Playbook has spent some time collecting views from key players and observers. Here’s what they said. — The tech firms: RACHEL CURRAN, head of public policy for Meta Canada, said it’s purely a business decision: News has social value, but it doesn’t factor into Meta’s bottom line. “There's nothing in the regulation-making process that can fix our fundamental concerns,” she said. “It's not a position we would like to be in.” Is a resolution possible? “It's kind of in the government's hands at this point.” MARK ISAKOWITZ, Google's vice president of government affairs and public policy for the U.S. and Canada, called it an “unworkable” policy and an “avoidable situation.” The company continues to talk with the government but the conversations would have been a lot easier before the law was passed, he said. “We were very specific about the changes we requested and the clarity we would need, and all of that was ignored. It wasn't until we were on the eve of royal assent that [the government] started paying some attention,” he said. “But the situation we find ourselves in now is it remains unclear how we could have the certainty in the regulatory process to continue to provide Canadians Canadian news links.” — Caught in the crossfire: JEFF ELGIE, CEO of Village Media, which runs 25 news publications across Ontario, said while his company’s sites have taken about the traffic hit he expected, its mature markets will all be fine. But Facebook was a useful tool for launching in new markets. That is now on pause. “I just think it's sad that this bill is potentially going to stall us or prevent us from growing and in my opinion will have devastating effects on others in the business that haven't been around as long and maybe aren't as mature in terms of business models and audience,” he told Playbook. “The government needs to get [the tech companies] back to the table if they want there to be a healthy news ecosystem and they should do it soon. The longer this lasts — the noise will disappear for Facebook, and then it will be easier for them to stay out of it.” — International proponents: ROD SIMS, on the success of Australia’s media bargaining code that Canada’s law is loosely based on: “Rather than the threat of arbitration being the thing that got [the tech companies’] attention, it was the threat of designation” under Australia's law. Australia’s model was designed to fix a “market failure, in the sense that the media companies don't have the bargaining power to negotiate with Facebook and Google because while [the two] do need news ... they don't need news from any one or two particular entities.” “I hope the parties [in Canada] get around the table and sort it out because if the Australian experience has anything to go by, there's deals to be done here which certainly benefit journalism and media.” |
Comments
Post a Comment