I’m Canadian living in Australia, and I’m actually on Facebook’s side on this one.
The Australian government is basically doing this for Rupert Murdoch and News Corp (Rupert is sort of a big deal around here), but even if they weren’t, it would still be wrong for thr government to do this. News outlets want Facebook to pay for news published on Facebook. Facebook probably has no problem with news links being posted on their site because it helps make them socially relevant.
On the other hand, news outlets benefit from the extra clicks, and ad revenue that goes with it. Some people get all their news on Facebook (and Twitter), so this seems to be a symbiotic relationship for the media and FB.
The government should stay out of it.
Yet I copied music when I was a kid. Who didn't when they were young. The problem was 'beyond me', and I saw nothing wrong with it. Then, as an adult, I befriended a local solo musician, and saw things from 'the other side'.
He was struggling to make a life for himself and his wife. He would spend hours playing, and doing other things to allow him to continue to perform. His instruments required maintenance, and such parts as strings and other things. I jokingly was a roadie for a few of his performances at local bars, and saw some of the worst behavior that rang hollow from my past. He had a large range of CDs that he sold at his gigs, and I heard multiple people urging their friends not to buy another CD as they would loan theirs to them to rip. The issue was the CDs weren't $50, or $25. He priced his CDs at between $5 and $10. People that would spend $20 at Starbucks refusing to help support a local musician that struggles to stay alive.
So, while the Australian moves appear to bolster News Corpse, they also boost other news outlets too I'm sure. If no one pays for them, and in FB's case, they actually make money off spreading the 'stolen' works, then is FB a 'scalper', hanging around trying to sell fake tickets? Are they a kid selling their compilation CDs to friends? I doubt that news organizations will go out of business, but they do have a beef about a company making money on their 'content' and not sharing the money.
Australia's issue with News Corpse and the Murdochs are regrettable, and they have paid a high price for it over the years, but trashing an entire industry is reckless.
And did anyone find FB's objections to carrying news part of a marketing campaign against FB? They don't see the need, or value, to be truthful. They don't want to pay to insure they are honest, and not marketing lies and distortions. They are fine with people popping off about 'Jewish space lasers' but refuse to share their money they make/made off of the work of others. *Some* remuneration is probably in order, but they have also functioned rather well without it, but the demand for payment recognizes the new method of 'broadcasting' news is through social media.
FB seems to be implicating themselves in the 'dumbing down of America', and the world. A disastrous self-own...