It may have seemed the platforms were taking a confident stance by appealing to Australian users directly. But really, it was a delayed and panic-based reaction.
If the government wants to save the social benefit of public-interest journalism, it must look beyond the News Media and Digital Platforms Mandatory Bargaining Code.
The titans of online advertising don’t want to be forced into putting a value on linking to news.
Far-right groups like the Proud Boys, seen here marching in Washington, D.C., on Dec. 12, are increasingly organizing their activities on messaging services like Telegram.
Stephanie Keith/Getty Images
The code could require Google and Facebook to pay up for simply including links to news articles from other sites. This has never been a requirement on the web.
Twitter’s ban of Trump has concerned free speech advocates across the political spectrum.
Jaap Arriens/NurPhoto via Getty Images
It’s concerning that tech executives can exercise so much power over who can use their platforms. But the alternative – government intervention – could be much worse.
Amid increasingly sophisticated ploys online, it can be difficult to tell the difference between innocent social networking and a national security offence.
In November 2020 photo, a demonstrator joins others outside of the home of Facebook CEO Mark Zuckerberg to protest what they say is Facebook spreading disinformation in San Francisco.
(AP Photo/Jeff Chiu)
Jeremy Shtern, Toronto Metropolitan University; Ope Akanbi, Toronto Metropolitan University y Steph Hill, Toronto Metropolitan University
American antitrust proceedings against Facebook represent a dramatic pivot, one that aligns the U.S. government with the global movement seeking greater public oversight of Big Tech.
Twitter and Facebook suspended Donald Trump’s accounts after his posts commenting on the Capitol riot.
(Shutterstock)