Introduction by Croakey: Our news and communications systems are a big, fat steaming mess – locally, nationally and globally.
If this sounds like an over-statement, think of the many communities in Australia and elsewhere that are devoid of truly local news organisations. Think of the undermining of public broadcasters, and of the power of Elon Musk, Meta et al and of untransparent, unaccountable algorithms in shaping access to news and information, as well as in undermining many other determinants of health.
Think also of the unrelenting, dangerous tide of misinformation, disinformation and online scammers.
It is well past time for governments in Australia and elsewhere to step up in ensuring people and communities have equitable access to reliable, safe and relevant news and information (see, for example, our #DigitalNationBuilding archive).
In the United States, New York has become the first state to commit significant resources toward keeping local journalism alive, Columbia Journalism Review reported this week. The Local Journalism Sustainability Act was included in New York’s recently passed state budget, setting aside $US 90 million to subsidise local news for the next three years.
Supporting public interest journalism is, of course, only part of the solution. In our submission to the National Health and Climate Strategy consultation last year, Croakey called for a whole-of-government approach to addressing our toxic news and communications system.
“The news and information ecosystem currently does not support communities to be informed about and engaged with climate mitigation and adaptation,” our submission read.
As we’ve long argued, media and communications policy is too important to be left to Media and Communications Ministers and agencies, and sectoral interests.
The health sector and wider civil society have a vital stake in these policy concerns, and are encouraged to engage with related Federal Budget discussions next week, and beyond.
And as the Albanese Government considers whether to designate Meta under the News Media Bargaining Code (see this recent Croakey Health Media statement on why this would be problematic), it’s worth considering the perspectives below from Canada, arguing that similar legislation there has been disastrous.
The article was first published by The Conversation in Canada under the headline, Meta’s Canadian news ban could put people at risk during public emergencies.
Archie McLean and Peter Ryan write:
The British Columbia Government recently announced plans to work with American tech company Meta this wildfire season to deliver important public safety information. Premier David Eby called it a “major step,” and said he was appreciative that a deal could be reached.
While this is a welcome development, Meta is still blocking news outlets from publishing to Facebook and Instagram, including during public safety emergencies when information is needed most. The company took this action in response to Parliament passing the Online News Act in June 2023.
Last summer, the ban made it difficult for news outlets and emergency officials to deliver timely information to the public. This was made more challenging because people are often dispersed geographically and clinging to their phones and social media for reliable guidance. One Yellowknife news editor, in the midst of an evacuation, called the ban “stupid and dangerous.”
With wildfire season underway, Meta’s ban continues to display a disappointing lack of corporate responsibility and disdain for Canadian users. If they don’t reverse the news ban during emergencies, the Government should look at ways to force them to open their platforms under some circumstances.
Longer term, the Federal Government must revise the ill-considered law that provoked this fight.
In emergencies, information is key
There are already more than 100 fires burning in British Columbia alone. Officials have warned that drought conditions across the country may lead to an even worse fire season than last year.
In these types of emergencies, accurate and current information is vital for health, safety and survival. Crisis communicators and emergency management agencies work with public officials, media organisations and other infrastructure crews to get vital updates and messages to the public through as many commonly co-ordinated channels as possible.
Facebook remains the most popular social media platform in Canada and public communicators understand its importance.
For example, Drexel University’s School of Public Health houses an online Social Media Message Library that provides examples of social media messaging best practices during crises and emergencies, including successful instances from Facebook.
Thankfully, government Facebook and Instagram pages have been able to post critical emergency information during the ban. But for public safety information to reach as many people as possible, overworked communications teams need news outlets to amplify their messages.
Filling the information vacuum
A recent study from the Media Ecosystem Observatory, an interdisciplinary collaboration between McGill University and the University of Toronto, suggests that six months after the ban, roughly a third of Canadians still use Facebook or Instagram for news and current affairs information.
In northern, rural and Indigenous communities, where there is often poor communications infrastructure and long distances between population centres, this is likely much higher.
With news unavailable on the platform, we have seen some small shifts in user behaviour.
According to the study, users’ political engagement appears to have stayed the same and some sites, such as the conservative Canada Proud network, have seen an increase in engagement.
News outlets, meanwhile, have seen their own engagement plummet. Screenshots of news articles have become the preferred way to get around the ban, especially during emergencies like the Yellowknife evacuation.
We have also seen the rise of social media influencers wielding disproportionate sway during emergencies. For example, during the August 2023 wildfires in the Shuswap Lake region in British Columbia, conspiracy theories and misinformation spread faster than the mainstream media’s messages in small communities.
How to solve this mess
It didn’t have to be this way.
The Liberal government’s Online News Act — which forces large social media companies to negotiate with news outlets for compensation — was flawed from the start.
The Government ignored warnings about the law’s potentially disastrous consequences for small, independent media outlets that rely on social media to distribute their content and communicate with audiences.
In forging ahead, the Government has provoked what law professor Michael Geist called a “lose-lose-lose-lose scenario.” It’s bad for news organisations, bad for the platforms and even worse for the public.
And while Meta’s actions are over the top, they telegraphed their intentions, which the Trudeau Government decided to ignore.
Google made similar threats but eventually reached a $100 million agreement with the Canadian Government in November 2023.
Meta, on the other hand, has chosen profit over tackling misinformation. Their own corporate principles commit to public safety and building community. If Meta was acting on these principles, they would be supplying emergency responders and Canadians with their communication tools during times of crisis, regardless of their battles with the government.
So far, Meta has shown no appetite to change their policy. They are fighting similar battles in Australia and elsewhere and appear willing to make an example out of Canada.
If Meta does not reconsider their position, the Liberal Government must explore legal or regulatory options to force them to open their platforms to news outlets during public emergencies.
Further, the Government needs to scrap or revise the Online News Act to require and incentivise social platforms like Facebook to be available for media amplification during public emergencies.
Last summer, premiers, Indigenous groups and other members of the public requested the Meta media ban stop during emergencies. As wildfire season begins again, the company and Federal Government should make sure the public has access to potentially life-saving information.
Authors
Archie McLean is an associate professor of journalism and digital media at Mount Royal University. Before coming to Calgary, he served as the managing editor for CBC North, based in Yellowknife. He also worked as a reporter and editor at the Edmonton Journal, and served as the chair of journalism at MacEwan University.
Dr Peter Ryan, APR, is an associate professor in the Department of Public Relations at Mount Royal University in Calgary; he also currently serves as the President of the Calgary chapter of the Canadian Public Relations Society (CPRS) and sits on the advisory board of the Centre for Crisis and Communication (CCRC).
See Croakey’s archive of articles on public interest journalism and health
