First Australia, maybe Europe, now America mulls effort to potentially make Google, Facebook pay for news

Journalism Competition and Preservation Act has been proposed twice already. Will it survive this time?

Both chambers of Congress reintroduced a bill on Wednesday that would give American publishers the power to negotiate with tech companies, like Facebook and Google, over the use of news content online.

The bill, known as the Journalism Competition and Preservation Act (JCPA), has received bipartisan support in the House and the Senate. Representatives David Cicilline (D-RI), and Ken Buck (R-CO) and Senators Amy Klobuchar (D-MN) and John Kennedy (R-LA) have backed the legislation. The bill, however, still needs to be passed by both sides before it has the chance to be approved as law.

Cicilline first introduced the JCPA in 2018; it proposed news organizations should be allowed to band together for a 48-month period and collectively pressure the likes of Facebook and Google into negotiating a deal involving news content on the web giants' platforms. Today's antitrust laws forbid publishers from unifying for bargaining power, hence the need for this act to grant an exemption.

Said negotiations would be open ended as far as the law is concerned: the publishers could push for payment for the use of headlines and snippets of articles, or the full thing, on the pages of the internet goliaths; the prioritization of publications and outlets in search results to give netizens up-to-date information; highly visible links to subscriptions; a greater slice of ad revenue; and so on.


Microsoft sides with media groups, together they urge Europe to follow Australia's lead, make Google, Facebook pay for news article links


The legislation, funnily enough, failed to take off in Congress. Another attempt was made in 2019, but that withered and died too. Now, lawmakers in the Senate are also having another crack at passing the legislation [PDF] in the hopes that it will be successful this time round.

“Newspapers are locked in a life-or-death struggle with tech giants like Google and Facebook, and it’s not a fair fight,” Senator Kennedy said in a statement.

“Local papers have continued to deliver news despite declines in circulation, but readers are losing out as their options for news coverage evaporate. This bill will support the independence of local papers by giving news publishers the power to collectively negotiate with digital platforms like Google and Facebook. Google and Facebook aren’t just companies — they’re countries, and we can’t tolerate tech giants’ strangling their print news competitors."

It’s a good time to reintroduce the Journalism Competition and Preservation Act. A similar battle raged in Australia over its News Media Bargaining Code, in which Facebook temporarily suspended all news content on its social media site and Google threatened to shut down Google Search for all netizens Down Under. A deal of sorts was struck eventually.

Things are picking up steam in Europe, too. Microsoft is working together with four European media trade groups to persuade the EU to introduce new laws that would require Google and Facebook to pay publishers for using news content. ®

Similar topics

Other stories you might like

  • Google has more reasons why it doesn't like antitrust law that affects Google
    It'll ruin Gmail, claims web ads giant

    Google has a fresh list of reasons why it opposes tech antitrust legislation making its way through Congress but, like others who've expressed discontent, the ad giant's complaints leave out mention of portions of the proposed law that address said gripes.

    The law bill in question is S.2992, the Senate version of the American Innovation and Choice Online Act (AICOA), which is closer than ever to getting votes in the House and Senate, which could see it advanced to President Biden's desk.

    AICOA prohibits tech companies above a certain size from favoring their own products and services over their competitors. It applies to businesses considered "critical trading partners," meaning the company controls access to a platform through which business users reach their customers. Google, Apple, Amazon, and Meta in one way or another seemingly fall under the scope of this US legislation. 

    Continue reading
  • Makers of ad blockers and browser privacy extensions fear the end is near
    Overhaul of Chrome add-ons set for January, Google says it's for all our own good

    Special report Seven months from now, assuming all goes as planned, Google Chrome will drop support for its legacy extension platform, known as Manifest v2 (Mv2). This is significant if you use a browser extension to, for instance, filter out certain kinds of content and safeguard your privacy.

    Google's Chrome Web Store is supposed to stop accepting Mv2 extension submissions sometime this month. As of January 2023, Chrome will stop running extensions created using Mv2, with limited exceptions for enterprise versions of Chrome operating under corporate policy. And by June 2023, even enterprise versions of Chrome will prevent Mv2 extensions from running.

    The anticipated result will be fewer extensions and less innovation, according to several extension developers.

    Continue reading
  • I was fired for blowing the whistle on cult's status in Google unit, says contractor
    The internet giant, a doomsday religious sect, and a lawsuit in Silicon Valley

    A former Google video producer has sued the internet giant alleging he was unfairly fired for blowing the whistle on a religious sect that had all but taken over his business unit. 

    The lawsuit demands a jury trial and financial restitution for "religious discrimination, wrongful termination, retaliation and related causes of action." It alleges Peter Lubbers, director of the Google Developer Studio (GDS) film group in which 34-year-old plaintiff Kevin Lloyd worked, is not only a member of The Fellowship of Friends, the exec was influential in growing the studio into a team that, in essence, funneled money back to the fellowship.

    In his complaint [PDF], filed in a California Superior Court in Silicon Valley, Lloyd lays down a case that he was fired for expressing concerns over the fellowship's influence at Google, specifically in the GDS. When these concerns were reported to a manager, Lloyd was told to drop the issue or risk losing his job, it is claimed. 

    Continue reading

Biting the hand that feeds IT © 1998–2022