Lets talk about control
This June Canada passed the Online News Act requiring online platforms and search engines to negotiate with news publishers to license their content. In other words to get paid for distributing their content.
Today's NYT reports on the response. It's what you'd expect from a entity with that much power. Meta, the company behind Facebook and Instagram, has started blocking news articles on its social networking services in Canada. Content from local Canadian news and international outlets will not be visible to Canadians using the platforms.
We know they have power but let's talk about control. Control over information about the world around us, about policy, politics, the local fire department, sports, and, well, just about everything. Information we need for a healthy democracy, an inclusive economy and a responsive government. Before I go on, it's worth noting that we live in America - where the equal time law no longer exists, where huge political outfits masquerading as media outlets have enormous reach and free speech (with little consequence) because corporate personhood speech is protected now by the Supreme Court.
Other than all that how did Meta get so much control over information. Here's my simple take:
First came the internet and the world opened up - slowly at first, and then in a flood.
Then lots of things we use to pay for became free - music, news, everything on Youtube, etc.
Then, or during, we got hooked on “social” media- it helped us connect with “friends,” sell stuff, create modern day fan clubs, share anything we wanted with anyone and everyone (we’re all pundits now,) and, yep, click on links and read stuff.
So, it was logical for people to shed newspaper subscriptions. Why pay for free stuff? And there's so much of it taking up my time, anyway.
So we’re hooked. A lot of us. The market maniacs will say it’s about choice and competition. We now have far more choices and it’s our choice to or not to buy a newspaper (and even be unconcerned about the world around us.) Competition is the natural force of progress so those newspapers just didn't survive because they weren’t the fittest, as they say.
Facebook says they shouldn’t pay for news on their site because they are just a platform for individuals to share what they want. Facebook isn't doing the sharing so they aren't responsible.
Of course, they say that they are actually helping news outlets because more people get exposed to their site when they click on a shared article.
In a blog post, the company said the Online News Act “misrepresents the value news outlets receive when choosing to use our platforms.”
In other words they should be happy with the "exposure."
So Facebook and Google are now in control of knowledge that we need to foster a healthy democracy and a decent country. We “gave” it to them I suppose but they definitely “took” it. Took it with sophisticated neuroscience that generated ways to get us hooked (that damn “like button!”)
Now what? They use the power that comes with that control to decide who gets the news and who doesn’t. That's why we shouldn't give powerful corporations control over important things. Once they have it, it's hard to take it away - and they make sure of that.
All because we think they should pay instead of taking stuff and handing it out freely.
A final note about exposure. That’s what musicians are told when they want to get paid. Be thankful for the exposure. For example, there's a campaign to get South by Southwest (SXSW) to actually pay the artists who perform there. SXSW gives them a wristband to attend the conference, and they should be thankful for the "exposure." Here's what a SXSW representative told the Austin Arts and Rec board: "We're trying to create a milieu, a community during the festival so that artists can really make a decision-- is this my career, or do I need to back to medical school or whatever it is?"
It should be obvious but it's worth saying out loud: EXPOSURE DOESN'T PAY THE RENT!