Australia made a deal to keep news on Facebook. Why couldn't Canada?

Back in February2021, Facebookblocked news on its platformsacross Australia to protest aproposed law that would haveforced it, along with Google, topay media companies for stories appearing on their sites.

About a week later,Facebook and Google struck a deal with the Australian government and the restriction stopped. Yet inCanada, such a deal never materialized.

Instead, Ottawa passed the Online News Act in June, requiringtech giants to pay news outlets for content they share or otherwise repurpose.

And on Tuesday, Facebook's parent company, Meta, responded by announcing it had officially begun to end news availability on its platforms in Canada.

So did Canada miss an opportunity to secure its own deal and avoid the current situation?

'Fundamental misreading'

Before Ottawa passed its law, Meta and Google had both threatened to block the sharing of news on their platforms in Canada.

"It feels like there were many that put a great deal of stock in the Australian situation and thought that, 'Well, this is all just a bluff and they will ultimately come back to the table,'" said University of Ottawa law professor Michael Geist, who is also theCanada Research Chair ininternet and e-commerce law.

WATCH | HowMeta'sblocking of news will impact media companies and consumers

Meta is pulling news off your feed. Now what?

1 year ago

Duration 4:52

Meta Facebook and Instagrams parent company is starting to widely block news content on its platforms in Canada. A media expert and local publisher break down why its happening and how it will impact news organizations and consumers.

As Geist pointed out in a recent blog, some Canadian industry leaders, lobbyists and academics, were, before the bill passed,assuring the Senate that Meta would back down.

"I think it was a fundamental misreading of what took place in Australia," he said.

The legislation in Australia, theNews Media Bargaining Code, governsconduct between Australian news businesses and "designated"digital platforms.

Originally, however, the bill that was being discussed was similar to what the Canadian law is now, meaning Meta and Google would have been legislated to pay news media companies if their stories appeared on their platforms.

That's what prompted Facebook's temporaryban.

But the ban, comingbefore the legislation had passed, gavethe Australian government some space to negotiate,saysDiana Bossio, an associate professor in media and communications at Melbourne's Swinburne University of Technology.

"And they took out one really, really vital part of the legislation. And that's 'designation,'" she said.

Now, Australia's Treasurer candesignate,and thus force, digital platformslike Meta and Googleto pay for news.

ButMeta and Googlehave yet to bedesignated.

"That's why Meta pulled that stunt [in 2021]," Bossio said."It didn't want to be forced by the legislation to pay."

But, under the impliedthreat of being designated,both Meta and Google made separate deals with a series of media companies in Australia. Those deals, according toJordan Guiao,research fellow at the Australia Institute's Centre for Responsible Technology, haveresulted in more than30 commercial agreementsatapproximately $200 million in valueto news organizations.

WATCH | Meta blocks news content to Canadians:

Meta moves to block news on Facebook and Instagram in Canada

1 year ago

Duration 2:34

The Canadian law doesn't have that flexibility, says Geist.

"That was a pretty important difference where the Australian government had basically left itself with the wiggle room to engage in that kind of negotiation," Geist said. "The Canadian government, not so much."

Alfred Hermida,a journalism professor at the University of British Columbia, says,in Australia,the threat of being legislated may have ledthe platforms tomakemore deals withnews organizations than they would have done before.

"But they still made thosedeals on their own terms individually, privately deciding who got money, who didn't getmoney, and how much money to each outlet," he said.

"And the government wasn't involved at all."

For both Meta and Google, it's not aboutthe money but the principle of being regulated and the precedent it might set in other jurisdictions, Hermida said.

That's why Hermidasaysit's hard to see a solution in Canada that would bring Canadian news back to Meta. Metafearsthat if it agreesto be legislated in Canada, then it would be pressured to be legislated in other places, Hermida says.

"This is not just a Canadian story. This is a global story," he said.

"Given that other countries and places in the U.S. are looking at this as well, [Meta and Google]don't want to be in a situation where they set a precedent saying, 'Yes, we accept this law and we will abide by it.'"