The one where Facebook 'unfriends' Australia
We're witnessing the danger of a digital marketing monopoly play out in real time
Facebook banned the news in Australia. No, seriously …
As part of an attempt to “level the playing field,” the Australian government introduced legislation that would force tech giants to pay for the news content that is shared on their platforms. As part of an attempt to “nah, dawg” that proposed law, Facebook quickly shut ‘er all down.
In a statement posted on the company’s website, Facebook explained it was "facing a stark choice: attempt to comply with a law that ignores the realities of this relationship, or stop allowing news content on our services in Australia.” It chose the latter. But before you criticize the soulless tech behemoth for removing critical information from its site — which millions of Australian users have come to rely upon as a vital source — it should be noted that the ban was enacted “with a heavy heart.”
Australian Prime Minister Scott Morrison, meanwhile, isn’t backing down. He reacted to the company’s decision to “unfriend” Australia by saying, “We simply won’t be intimidated.” The PM’s statement — and you really can’t make this up — was posted on Facebook.
Social media is a bit like processed food. I don’t even necessarily mean the ultra processed junk we might order from a fast food counter from time to time. I’m thinking about the cereal we have for breakfast or the deli meat we have at lunch. More regular stuff. We mostly know it’s bad for us, but removing it from our lives at this point would represent such an enormous upheaval to our way of life that we sacrifice our health to maintain convenience.
Earlier this week, when news of Facebook’s decision was first announced, there was commentary suggesting that this might actually be good for publishers; that not having news readily available in social media feeds would force users to go directly to the source. Unfortunately, those making this suggestion were either incredibly naive or lucky enough to remain completely unaware of things like Chartbeat and Google Analytics.
One of the strangest dualities of human nature is that we’re exceptionally curious and simultaneously, exceedingly lazy. We want to understand everything, but we’ll often take the simplest, most easily accessible explanation to quench that thirst for comprehension.
In other words, if processed foods were to be removed from our grocery stores, we’re not going to grow our own grains or raise our own animals for slaughter. We’re more likely to simply not eat those foods at all. Likewise, if decades ago, the six o’clock network news were deemed to be unprofitable and shuttered, people weren’t going to suddenly spend the dinner hour reading afternoon newspapers.
In the first day since the ban, total web traffic to Australian news sites dropped 13 per cent, according to Chartbeat. The analytics company’s analysis suggested that “when Facebook traffic dropped off, overall Australian traffic did not shift to other platforms.” Meanwhile, the Jodies and Sheilas living abroad were among the most affected by the lack of click-through opportunities. Total traffic to Australian news sites from outside the country fell by about 30 per cent.
In the days following the January 6th Storming of the Capitol, Facebook and (even more so) Twitter were quick to ban accounts accused of inciting the riots and disseminating false information that fuelled the violence. This was met with accusations from the right of ideological bias.
And there was a small part of me that tacitly accepted that suggestion. I don’t think I’m alone in still buying into the original ideals — or at least the marketing of the supposed principles — that the invention and development of tech is to do a good thing: connect us. This, to me, this sort of virtue, is something I aligned with a more progressive outlook. When learning about the internet in high school, when — warning: about to date myself here — onboarding onto social media near the end of university, it felt like what was happening was founded on some level of goodness, a motivation to make things better.
Rest assured, however, that the only ideological allegiance almost any enormous company — including social media and tech giants — has is connected to lucre. And money remains a far more likely motivator than any mid-20s notion of kumbaya togetherness. What’s happening in Australia only reinforces that there’s no such thing as corporate altruism founded on the principles of maintaining an informed electorate.
It’s borderline hilarious that the response to the Capitol Storming and the ban in Australia could happen relatively quickly when Facebook (especially) spent the previous four years moaning and groaning over the difficulty inherent to ensuring fake news wasn’t being spread on its platform and refusing to take responsibility for Russian attacks on American democracy.
This is the danger of a monopoly. Facebook is one of two companies with an enormous share of worldwide digital marketing. This is what allows them to pull a siege like this when things don’t go their way. I’m certainly not advocating for state-controlled social media or treating it like a public utility. (What a mess that would be.) But what about antitrust action and breaking up Facebook?
What would happen if Facebook became Facebook, Instagram, WhatsApp and Messenger? I am absolutely not smart enough to fully understand the ramifications of that, but I can understand how it might hinder what’s happening in Australia right now and how it might make it more difficult for a foreign power to weaponize social media and bend people to their will.
Of course, Facebook is only one half of the digital marketing monopoly.
It’s interesting to note that Google has taken a different approach to Australia’s laws. The company has negotiated with Australian news outlets to licence content. Again, who knows if this is a case of the company siding more with civic responsibility than shareholder value, or if it just seems like that? But at the very least, the tactic doesn’t involve a siege on the flow of information. That seems … if not better than not quite as bad.
Either way, I think the story of 2021 is going to be how we began to deal with the stranglehold big tech holds on digital marketing. At the end of last year, the U.S. Federal Trade Commission sued Facebook for buying up competitors as a means of eliminating competition. Google is also facing antitrust lawsuits. The cases will take years to work its way through federal court, and could end up as arduous and unsuccessful as the Microsoft antitrust case. But at least it’s something.
Meanwhile, in Canada, the government is giving money directly to publishers so they can maintain the absurd bonus structures for their executives while continuing to cut jobs and stagnate salaries lower down the chain. It’s a bit like combatting a parasite by simply eating more.
It’s funny to me that in coming to its decision to block Australian news, Facebook claims it is Australia that is ignoring the reality of a relationship that has developed between social media and publishers (and therefore social media and the public). So much of the company’s behaviour — especially over the last five years — has been to shrug its shoulders at the responsibilities inherent to any relationship. Yet, right here and now, Facebook seems acutely aware. If only we could be as equally mindful.
Photo by David Clode on Unsplash