New Bill Raises Fears Of Big Tech–Media Collusion Against Independent Outlets
New Bill Raises Fears Of Big Tech–Media Collusion Against Independent Outlets
Authored by Joseph Lord
via The Epoch Times, September 9, 2022
A Senate bill is raising fears among some for its potential to
enable Big Tech and mainstream media outlets to collude
against smaller and independent media outlets.
The bill, dubbed the Journalism
Competition and Protection Act (JCPA), would
supersede some existing antitrust laws and allow media companies to band
together to negotiate with Big Tech platforms like
Facebook, Google, and Twitter.
Specifically, the JCPA says:
“A news
content creator may not be held liable under the antitrust laws for engaging in
negotiations with any other news content creator during the 4-year period
beginning on the date of enactment of this Act to collectively withhold content
from, or negotiate with, an online content distributor regarding the terms on
which the news content of the news content creator may be distributed by the
online content distributor.”
In brief, this means that online and print media outlets,
including some of the largest and longest-established names in the industry,
could band together in a kind of media union to demand concessions from tech
companies in order for the coalition to continue to allow their content on the
platform. Under existing antitrust laws, such cartels—which describe a
collusion of firms in an industry to join together for a common financial or
industry outcome—are decidedly illegal.
Proponents of the JCPA have presented it as a much-needed panacea
to address dwindling numbers of dedicated local media companies who, proponents
say, are often left behind in the umbrella of Big Tech algorithms and
advertising capacity.
In a change.org petition that
has garnered over 23,000 signatures, the News Media Alliance, one of the most
outspoken supporters of the bill, explained this position, presenting it as a
hardline position against the reach of big tech power and influence.
“Today,
many local newspapers are struggling to stay in business. Big Tech platforms,
such as Facebook and Google, control how we access trustworthy news online and
how journalism is displayed, prioritized, and monetized. They capture the vast
majority of all digital advertising dollars because of their outsized ability
to collect consumer data.
“Local
newspaper revenues have gone down and as a result, thousands of journalists
have been laid off, ‘news deserts’ are emerging across the country, and
dangerous misinformation that threatens the fabric of our democracy continues
to flourish.”
But
opponents of the bill have raised alarm bells, warning that in practice the
policy will only serve to benefit established legacy and mainstream outlets, to
the exclusion of anti-establishment, independent publications.
Specifically, opponents point to a section of an updated draft
of the JCPA that could effectively permit legacy media cartels to demand that
tech platforms censor or outright refuse to permit newer, less-established
media outlets from publishing on the platform.
Under the text of the bill, media cartels’ negotiations with
tech platforms must go beyond mere monetary concessions.
In
practice, critics fear, this could allow legacy media outlets to demand that
smaller outlets peddling so-called “misinformation” or “fake news”—which many
on the right see as a thinly-veiled catch-all term intended to denounce and
delegitimize conservative outlets—be barred from publishing content on tech
platforms.
Technically, the bill ensures that this will not happen.
Under the terms of the bill, coalitions of media outlets banding
together to collectively bargain cannot exclude outlets from the cartel on
grounds “[related] to the size of an eligible digital journalism provider or
the views expressed by its content.”
In other words, the cartels cannot exclude members from the
negotiating table because they are considered too small or because their
expressed beliefs go outside of the political mainstream.
But
critics say that the grounds which are permissible to exclude an
outlet—including an outlet’s “trustworthiness,” “extremism,” “misinformation,”
“hate speech,” “conspiracy,” “expertise,” “authoritativeness,” and others—could
allow media cartels to bar newer or anti-establishment outlets from negotiations,
given the relatively subjective nature of such criteria.
Among the critics of the bill is House Minority Leader Kevin
McCarthy (R-Calif.), who has encouraged Republicans to oppose the legislation
and has called the bill “the antithesis of conservatism.”
“Attempts
by big media and Democrats in Congress to collude and monopolize economic
models poses a tremendous threat to free speech and a free press,” McCarthy
told Breitbart News.
“Never before has the opportunity been as open for startup news
outlets as it is today,” he continued. “Americans now have more choices to get
information and make decisions for their communities and elected leaders. That
makes Democracy stronger and creates a whole new class of entrepreneurs that
will also drive job growth. As we have seen in other industries, disrupters
make legacy players uneasy and those legacy players are often willing to do
whatever it takes to hold onto their market share and power.
“This is
the antithesis of conservatism and House conservatives will fight for an open
and free market—especially one that advances free speech and a free
press,” he concluded.
The bill, which was first put forward by Democrats in both
chambers in the spring of 2021, is set for markup in the Senate Judiciary
Subcommittee on Competition Policy, Antitrust, and Consumer Rights on Sept. 7.
Sen. Amy Klobuchar (D-Minn.), who chairs the subcommittee, has
expressed her support for the legislation in the past, and it seems likely that
Democrats will support the bill, advancing it to a possible floor vote in the
Senate. It is unclear whether the bill, if advanced, will be able to garner
enough GOP support to overcome the 60-vote filibuster threshold.
Comments
Post a Comment