There’s rather a lot going on in Australian policy-making around social media, most of it thoroughly disconnected from evidence, scholarship, and sanity – and I’m sure I’ll have more to say on some of these developments in future posts, too. For the moment, though, here is an update on some ongoing work surrounding the renewed controversies about Australia’s ill-fated News Media Bargaining Code (NMBC), a thoroughly misshapen piece of legislation which sought to force major digital media platforms to hand over some of their revenue to cross-subsidise struggling commercial news media operators.
The inherent flaws in this approach led to Meta banning all news content from Facebook in Australia for just over a week after the NMBC was introduced in February 2021, and it took some urgent negotiations and what amounted to a significant backdown by the then government to resolve the situation at least for the time being; but with those temporary solutions now reaching the end of their timeframe the discussion about the NMBC has flared up again. Meanwhile, ill-advised by some of the same people who constructed the NMBC in Australia, Canada passed a very similar law in 2023, and as a result has seen a permanent ban of news content from Canadian Facebook since August 2023 – with all the substantial negative consequences that the absence of news from what remains a very important social media platform was always going to produce.
Recently , I was asked to contribute a brief overview of the NMBC saga in Australia to a public event organised by the United States’ Computer & Communications Industry Association (CCIA), and because of time differences made that contribution in the form of a pre-recorded video statement – the video as well as the full text of that statement are below. Much of this also builds on our QUT Digital Media Research Centre submission to the Australian federal parliament’s current Joint Select Committee on Social Media and Australian Society, which (amongst an incoherent laundry list of other issues) also addresses the future of the NMBC. I led the development of section two of our submission, which works through the flaws of the NMBC and proposes saner solutions for subsidising quality Australian journalism than the NMBC could ever hope to be. (In fact, I also discuss this in a recent episode of the DMRC’s new podcast series Read Them Sideways.)
But back to the CCIA event: here is the video of my contribution, and the full text of what I had to say. At the bottom of this post, I’ll also embed a recording of the full CCIA discussion.
The next speaker in this Social Media & Society 2024 session is Abby Youran Qin, whose focus is on affective polarisation. She references the famous Adamic & Glance study that showed strong homophily between Republican and Democrat bloggers, respectively, and suggests that this can also be seen as an indication of affective polarisation.
The next speaker in this Social Media & Society 2024 session is Nic DePaula, whose interest is in the association between local and regional risk levels and social media use and engagement in the US in the context of COVID-19. This is in the broader context of public health communication on social media, which is now common if unevenly distributed across agencies, due to various internal and external factors.
The next speaker in this Social Media & Society 2024 session is Felipe Soares, whose focus is on asymmetric polarisation on Facebook in Brazil. He begins by noting the difficulty in defining polarisation, given the wide range of definitions available in the literature, and points to our work at QUT in developing the concept of destructive polarisation as a way to determine whether the polarisation that we might observe in any given context is in fact a problem at all.
And the final speaker in this Social Media & Society 2024 conference session is Victoria O’Meara, whose focus is on the anti-vaccine ‘Children’s Health Defense’ group, founded in 2016 and directed by Robert F. Kennedy Jr. until 2013; it is a key driver of health-related mis- and disinformation campaigns in the context COVID-19 and beyond.
Now that the Australian federal parliament’s Joint Select Committee on Social Media and Australian Society has commenced its hearings, the question of Australian policy towards social media platforms has gained in prominence yet again. The Select Committee is conducting a somewhat poorly defined, multi-issue inquiry into several loosely linked topics, and part of its focus is on the future of Australia’s News Media Bargaining Code (NMBC) – a policy which seeks to redirect some of the substantial revenues that digital media platforms generate from online advertising to the nation’s financially struggling, often unprofitable news publishers.
There are some serious issues with this idea, and with how the NMBC is constructed, and this already led to an eight-day ban of all news content on Facebook in 2021 that my QUT DMRC colleagues and I covered in previous research – and there’s every chance that government attempts to persist with the NMBC will result in news disappearing from Facebook and other platforms yet again, and this time for longer. In Canada, which made the fateful decision to essentially copy the NMBC’s approach in its legislation, news has been absent from Meta’s platforms since August 2023 now.
Anticipating such changes, I’ve recently accepted an invitation to discuss the NMBC and its consequences in an article for The Conversation, which was published a few days ago:
In addition, my colleagues and I in the QUT Digital Media Research Centre and the ARC Centre of Excellence for Automated Decision-Making and Society have also made our own submissions to the Select Committee – these should appear shortly on the Select Committee’s submissions site.
I will say that my involvement in these discussions is also prompted by the egregious selective innumeracy on these matters that has already become evident in the commercial news industry’s comments to the Selection Committee. This was demonstrated most blatantly recently by NewsCorp CEO Michael Miller, as reported in his own company’s media outlets:
It’s been a busy week, but we’ve reached the final session of the IAMCR 2024 conference in Christchurch, which begins with a paper by Samiksha Koirala and Soumik Pal on the use of social media in political campaigning in Bangladesh, Nepal, and India. They begin by noting the domination of South Asian politics by long-lived political dynasties; however, the emergence of social media as a campaigning space has begun to disrupt such structures.
The final speaker in this IAMCR 2024 session is my excellent QUT colleague Tariq Choucair, presenting our work on the discussions of the 2022 Qatar World Cup by online football communities (slides are below). This draws on the theory of third spaces: primarily apolitical spaces where political talk can emerge and often takes place in a more congenial, respectful manner. This means they have democratic potential: discussion there may be able to avoid political disagreement and the avoidance of political talk.
We apply this concept to the case of the Qatar World Cup, which was highly controversial for the Qatari regime’s dismissive approach to overall human and specific minority rights; we gathered posts and comments from domestic football fan groups on Facebook in English, Spanish, Portuguese, German, and Danish to examine how they addressed the Qatar World Cup and its many political controversies.
![[Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 2.0 License]](http://creativecommons.org/images/public/somerights20.gif "Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 2.0 License")
