Front Burner - How Meta’s news ban is affecting Canadians

Episode Date: August 24, 2023

On Monday, as people were still reeling from the devastation of the wildfires in B.C. and in the Northwest Territories, Prime Minister Justin Trudeau lashed out at Meta, the parent company of Facebook and Instagram, over its decision to block news from its platforms in Canada. The ban started a few weeks ago, in response to the federal government passing the Online News Act, Bill C-18. It’s a law that’s meant to get tech companies like Meta and Google to pay news outlets when their content is posted on their platforms. But rather than comply, Meta is choosing to block the sharing of news content on its platforms. Today on Front Burner, Alfred Hermida, a digital media scholar and professor at the UBC school of journalism, tells us how the ban has been working so far, and the kind of political and community reaction it’s brought out. Looking for a transcript of the show? They’re available here daily: https://www.cbc.ca/radio/frontburner/transcripts

In the Dragon's Den, a simple pitch can lead to a life-changing connection. Watch new episodes of Dragon's Den free on CBC Gem. Brought to you in part by National Angel Capital Organization, empowering Canada's entrepreneurs through angel investment and industry connections. This is a CBC Podcast. Hi, I'm Tamara Kandaker. So on Monday, as people were still reeling from the devastation of the wildfires in B.C. and in the Northwest Territories, Prime Minister Justin Trudeau lashed out at Meta, the parent company of Facebook and Instagram, over its decision to block news from its platforms in Canada. We're simply saying that in a democracy, quality local journalism matters. ever before when people are worried about their homes, worried about communities, worried about the worst summer for extreme weather events we've had in a long, long time. On the same day, we heard

a very similar message from BC Premier David Eby. I call on Facebook again, Mr. Zuckerberg, open up access to Canadian media so that British Columbians can share critical local information so they can be safe. Meta started blocking news on Facebook and Instagram at the beginning of August. The ban is a response to the federal government's Online News Act, which was meant to get tech companies like Meta and Google to pay news outlets when their content is posted on their platforms. Meta has refused to go along with the law, and Google has also threatened to ban Canadian news links from their search engine. We talked about all of this earlier in the summer when the ban wasn't in place yet,

but now that it is, we wanted to look at how it's actually been working and the kind of political and community reaction that it's brought out. So today I'm joined by Alfred Hermita, a digital media scholar and professor at the UBC School of Journalism. He's going to walk us through all of that. Hi, Alfred. Thank you so much for being here. It's my pleasure. So it's been a few weeks now since Meta started blocking news in Canada. And what has this ban looked like so far in practice?

Well, what Canadians have seen is when they try to post a link from CBC or from CTV or the Globe and Mail, that they wouldn't have been able to. Instead, they would have got a message saying, this content is blocked. So they wouldn't have been able to share the news. The one thing we don't really know is what's missing from people's news diets. We know that about a third of Canadians get some of their news from Facebook or used to. But now if the news is no longer being shared there, we don't know what they're not seeing because it's not there in the first place. But we do know that it's simply not there. Yeah. The one thing that I didn't realize what happened is that Facebook is, or Meta,

I should say, is also blocking international news, right? Like not just links from Canadian outlets. Yes, Meta is blocking anything that is news. And what Meta said is they're using the government's definition of what a news outlet is. So if it does reporting, current affairs, analysis, interpretation, opinion about current events and things that are happening on a daily basis, that's news, and they will block it. And they'll block it not just from Canadian outlets, but also from any international outlets. And we know that Canadians go to the New York Times, they go to the BBC, they go to MSN for news. All these news outlets will be blocked. I've also seen that there have been some non-news outlets that have gotten caught up

in this, like the Beaverton, for example, which is a satirical news outlet. So you mentioned these guidelines that they're using, but why is that happening? Why are satire websites getting caught up in the news block? Well, this is happening rather quickly. It's happening over the last few weeks. And like with any attempt at blocking content, there is going to be mistakes. One of the ways that Meta seems to be deciding what to block is if you say in your description or you classify yourself as a news outlet, the Beaverton who was caught in this, they've now changed their classification to entertainment and they're no longer blocked. So we have seen some people

being caught up in this, but certainly not as badly as when Meta did this in Australia a couple of years ago, where they blocked news on Facebook. And at that time, it also affected government agencies, wildfire services, emergency services. Domestic violence groups and emergency services are just some of the victims caught in the crossfire between Facebook and the federal government Right. And so then so far, have we seen any blocking of It sort of blocked anything that looked like news, regardless of who was posting it. Right. And so then so far, have we seen any blocking of official information from municipalities or other levels of government or anything like that? Or has it just been media so far? news organizations that have been blocked. So Wi-Fi services, local services can still post to Facebook. But what we've seen is people trying to get around the ban. So one of the things that I've noticed is instead of somebody posting a link to a story, they will cut and paste the text into their post and say, this is from this news outlet, or they'll post a screenshot. So people are finding

ways to get around the ban, but obviously it's much clunkier to take a screenshot or cut and paste the text than simply posting a link. So since this news block came into effect, what have we learned about the way that Canadians were using Facebook when it comes to news? we learned about the way that Canadians were using Facebook when it comes to news? Well, we know that social media is as popular for news as television. But Facebook in particular, over the past year, it had dropped. A year ago, we had about 40% of Canadians using Facebook for news. This past year, before the news blocking, that had dropped to about 29%. So there are already fewer and fewer Canadians using Facebook. What's interesting when you think about news on Facebook is people don't go to Facebook

for the news. But where Facebook came in with news is people sharing things that were relevant to them because they had a common interest, or people sharing things around their community. And that's where we've seen the impact being greatest on Canadians. The local news outlets that were posting information about their communities or residents there sharing local news stories, which maybe you weren't aware of, or you didn't go to that news site regularly, but you saw that pop up on Facebook as you were doing other things on Facebook. And certainly that's where we seem to have had the greatest impact. Those sort of community news stories, local news stories that Facebook is actually quite good at bringing together because it's around your social circles and your community circles.

That kind of brings us to the wildfires that have been happening in Western Canada this week. So we've heard the government call on Meta to lift the news block, saying that it's reckless, that it's hurting access to vital information about these wildfires in B.C. and in the Northwest Territories. So what do we know at this point about how this block has affected people who are dealing with the wildfires? It's very hard to know because obviously the immediate priority has been people's safety, the safety of their homes, and ensuring that the emergency services have all the resources to fight the wildfires. It's hard to know exactly what's missing because we don't know what would have been posted or what's been blocked. Right. I've seen some criticism that this is being felt harder in remote communities, northern communities, for example, that tend to be

indigenous. And I'm wondering if you could talk a bit about that and why the sharing of news on Facebook might be more vital in remote communities and Indigenous communities in particular? Facebook was valuable to rural communities and Indigenous communities because it serves as a place to connect with people from those communities who had moved into urban centres. And certainly there's been some research looking at Indigenous communities where you have the sort of more senior generations connecting with the younger generations who happen to be in the cities. And Facebook providing a way to connect with community, for buy and sell, to announce what's happening in your community, to connect about interests, and also to share news.

So it has had that bridging effect because it brings together older and younger generations in one place. And so that is still there. People can still talk about their communities, but they cannot share news links. And that's, I think, the loss there, that if those news links are not being shared, then people won't necessarily know about something that is relevant to them, is important to them, but they didn't know it was important until they saw somebody else post that to Facebook. What has been the response so far from news organizations and how have they reacted to the block?

Well, one of the ways news organizations have reacted is by trying to tell the audience that you can still go to our website, you can go to our app, you can tune into the radio, you can tune into television. The challenge with that is that we've had a sort of generation growing up in a digital social media environment. And what that means is our habits have changed. We're expecting news to come to us. There's so much news around us that to come to us. There's so much news around us that the expectation is if something's important enough, a friend will tell me, I'll hear a headline on the radio when I'm in the car, or I'll see it pop up on Facebook or on other social media. News organizations are now saying, well, we can't do that anymore. We need you to be more proactive. That's been one of the reactions from the news industry. The other

reaction has been realizing that being blocked on better platforms on Facebook and Instagram is actually damaging them because they rely on social media to reach a significant percentage of their audience. There'll be some people who will go to a website, but for a lot of people, they'll go to that website when they see a relevant link posted on Facebook. So we reached out to Meta for a response to the criticisms around keeping the block in place during the wildfires. And they've said that they've been clear since February about how they would respond to the Online News Act. They said, quote, we remain focused on ensuring people in Canada can use our technologies to connect with loved ones and access information. And they mentioned that

they have something called Safety Check that's allowed people affected by the wildfires to show others that they're okay, and that around 300,000 people have visited the Yellowknife and Kelowna crisis response pages on Facebook. So it doesn't seem like Meta is backing down. And what do you think is the thinking around continuing with the ban? Well, what's regrettable is that this is a situation we could have avoided. Bill C-18, the Online News Act, is well-intentioned, but it's deeply flawed. And it wasn't just meta telling the government it was deeply flawed. You had journalists and you had academics telling the government this was deeply flawed. And so in some ways, we're in a situation that could have been preventable had we tried to understand what was happening and also understand what happened in

Australia. When Australia was imposing similar legislation, Facebook did the same thing. It blocked news. It then backtracked and lifted that block. And that was interpreted as the Australian government's winning. But if you look at the small print, as we have to pay attention with everything, what happened there is the Australian government essentially tweaked their law. And the law in Australia is enacted, it exists, but it hasn't been applied to Facebook and Google. And so what you have a situation is in Australia when Meta and Google are doing exactly what they want to do, their own private commercial deals with needs provider, without government oversight, and without being forced to do this by the government. Meta and Google have been saying, we do not want to be regulated. We do not want to be told what to do and what we have to pay

for news. We want to do our own private deals. That's exactly what happened in Australia. But people misunderstood what happened. They're assuming that the government had won. And really, the government backed down in the face of the news block on Facebook. Right. So people were thinking that there was some sort of deal that was negotiated by the government. But really, it's that Meta was able to negotiate outside of that legislation that was introduced, right? And that's what they're asking for here. Exactly. In Australia, there was a loophole. And that's the difference here. With the current Canadian legislation, there is no loophole that would allow Meta and Google to

do exactly what they want to do, which is their own private deals. And it's also worth noting that both companies, both platforms have been doing private deals with media for years. There have been different programs in terms of direct funding, training, support, services, boot camps, etc., provided by Meta and Google to the Canadian news industry. So they've already been supporting it, but they want to do it on their own terms and not be told by government what they have to do. Yeah, the other two things that feel worth mentioning, which we've talked about on the show before, but Meta and Google had been saying that news is not a big revenue getter for them, right? And the other point is that there is a lot of interest internationally in seeing how this plays out in Canada. So it just doesn't seem like it's in Meta's interest to reverse the block and comply with what the government's asking for.

Now, Meta has argued that only about 3% of what people see on Facebook is news. So it does seem that from Meta's point of view, news is simply not important to the bottom line. And there's some indications internationally that Meta as a company is slowly withdrawing from being involved in the news environment. But like you say, this is not just a Canadian story. This is a global story because other governments and states are looking at what's happening in Canada and saying, how can we regulate these platforms, given that they've become de facto ways for people to learn about the world, to share news and information,

and they have significant power. And so for the platforms, they don't want to set a precedent in accepting regulation and legislation, because if they do that in Canada, then they'll be pushed to do that in other countries. In the Dragon's Den, a simple pitch can lead to a life-changing connection. Watch new episodes of Dragon's Den free on CBC Gem. Brought to you in part by National Angel Capital Organization. Empowering Canada's entrepreneurs through angel investment and industry connections. Hi, it's Ramit Sethi here. You may have seen my money show on Netflix. I've been talking about money for 20 years. Angel Investment and Industry Connections. That's not a typo. 50%. That's because money is confusing. In my new book and podcast, Money for Couples, I help you and your partner create a financial vision together. To listen to this podcast, just search for Money for Couples. criticism of this legislation, especially since Meta followed through with the news block. But the government has been standing firm. Like we talked about earlier, they've been really vocal

this week condemning Meta's decision to keep the block in place. Facebook is putting corporate profits ahead of our democracy and our well-being. And that's why Canada is not alone in standing up to say to the web giants that they have a responsibility to ensure Canadians can access quality local news in our democracy and around the world. Meanwhile, the news industry is hurting, especially local outlets. How likely is it, do you think, that the government will back down and change their position on this? I can understand why the government is holding firm, but it's hard to see a scenario where they can win in a battle against the platforms. These have simply, both Meta, Google, other platforms, have grown to a stage that they have almost become like private governments.

They're almost becoming their own little government with significant power globally. And so the issue here isn't just what the Canadian government can do, but what can we do globally to rein in some of the power of these platforms, both in how they manage our data, collect our data, sell our data, how they govern how we learn about the world, and their relationship with news. So what do you think then in the Canadian context, what can the government do at this point now that they're in this standoff with Meta? If we look at Australia, the Australian government there provided a way out of the standoff by essentially having a loophole in the law. Now, what happened in Australia is because of these private deals, news organizations there

are getting 200 million Australian dollars every year into the news industry. That is significant. The public service broadcaster ABC says it's been able to hire dozens and dozens of local news reporters thanks to funding from the platforms. So in Australia, this has helped the news industry, but it's only helped by the government stepping out of the way and letting the platforms do the deals themselves. the deals themselves. It's hard to see a scenario where Meta caves in and says, yep, we'll pay for news. And in fact, we're already seeing some signs from the Canadian government of softening on this. There's some signs in terms of how they've talked about how the law would be enacted and how they've talked about what would count as a contribution towards news. So not just cash, but also if you provide free services or training. So there has been some softening from the Canadian government. It's hard to see a scenario where Meta and Google accept this.

The stakes are too high. Yeah. I did want to ask you about Google really quickly. So Google also threatened to ban Canadian news links from its search engine, but they haven't followed through on that yet. So what do you make of that? And do you think that they're actually going to follow through on that threat? I think both with Meta and Google, we're at inflection point in terms of their engagement with the news. The science from Meta is that it's increasingly less interested in news and wants to pull back. For Google, it's different because news is actually important for Google. It's important

financially for Google. If you want to index the world's information, provide that to your consumers, to your audience, news has to be part of it. So there's an interest for Google in working out some kind of deal that allows them to have news on their platform. In fact, Google was already providing funding to 150 news publications through its Google Showcase initiative. So it was already paying for news, just in its own private commercial deals. Something I was hoping to end on, Alfred, is I'm curious, as a journalist, how you think we should move forward. So the Online News Act, which is the reason why Meta's blocking news on its platforms in Canada was introduced to help Canadian news companies

deal with their financial issues, some of which arguably came from the over-reliance on social media platforms to distribute news. And now it seems like that's sort of backfired on the government. And in the process, it's hurting news organizations, it's hurting news consumers. news organizations, it's hurting news consumers. So assuming nothing changes, what do you think Canadian media should do to adapt to this new reality? The challenge for news organizations is we're talking about behavioral change. And what we know is that the media habits that you grow up with are the media habits that stick with you for a lifetime. So that's why TV news is largely watched by an older audience, because television was a big source of information when

they were growing up. They developed those habits and those habits persisted. It's hard to change people's habits and it's certainly not going to happen overnight. The one thing we are seeing is that younger audiences are less reliant on something like Facebook. They're much more likely to get their news on platforms like TikTok. So the challenge for news organizations is not just how do we reach existing audiences that we can't through the platforms we used to use like Facebook and Instagram, but how do we then adapt to this changing world where there are these digital intermediaries between us and the audience? It might be Facebook today. It might be TikTok tomorrow. It might be some other platform in the

future. And that's a challenge for news organizations because it involves constant evolution, constant experimentation, and constant investment in trying to find ways of connecting with that audience. All right, Alfred, thank you so much for this. This was really interesting. I appreciate it. It's my pleasure. All right, that's all for today. Thank you so much for listening. I'm Tamara Kandaker, and I will talk to you tomorrow.