Navigating good news, bad news, and no news: issues associated with public and private communication online

Abstract

Social media platforms are certainly at the centre of some contentious topics at the moment. At the top of the ‘hot topics’ list, when this issue of Communication Research and Practice went to print, was Facebook’s latest audacious move which prevented news outlets’ content from being accessed via its platform. Commentary and condemnation have been widespread. Media scholars, journalists, and politicians did not hold back when it came to expressing their concerns about Facebook’s reaction to the Australian Federal Government’s plans to pass into law its News Media Bargaining Code which, if passed by the Senate, will require internet tech platforms like Facebook to negotiate compensation for news publishers whose content is accessed using the tech platform’s news sharing function. Facebook’s decision to follow through on its threat to block all news publishers’ in the face of this legislation being passed by the Australian House of Representatives, the lower house of the Australian Parliament, meant that the estimated 14 million Australians who use Facebook daily were unable to view or share news content produced by local or international news publishers and users outside Australia were denied the opportunity to view or post content sourced from Australian outlets for several days. While the Australian Prime Minister Scott Morrison described Facebook’s decision to block news rather than agree to negotiate payments for publishers as Google Search did as ‘arrogant’ (Quoted in the Sydney Morning Herald, 18/2/21), it has been more graphically described as the ‘nuclear option’ (See Tim Murphy, Co-Editor of Newsroom, 2021, 18/2/ 21). Misha Ketchell (2021, 18/2/21), the Executive director of the Australian Edition of The Commentator labelled it ‘aggressive’, ‘a muscle-flex’ and ‘an attempt to throw its weight around’, in an article informed by analysis from leading Australia media scholars including Diana Bossio, a member of Communication Research and Practice Editorial Advisory Group. The action was also described as ‘holding its users hostage’ (John Anthony, 2021, 18/2/21); ‘grossly irresponsible’ (Chris Cooper, Executive Director of Reset, quoted on www.abc.net.au/news) and ‘dangerous’ by Maryke Steffens (AU Edition of The Commentator, 18/2/21). Julien Knight, Chairperson of the British Parliament’s digital, culture, media and sport committee went so far as to describe Facebook’s move as ‘this bullyboy action’ and suggested it will motivate legislators around the World to follow Australia’s example (Quoted in The Guardian, 2021, 18/2/21). With The Guardian framing Facebook’s motivation as ‘an attempt to bully a democracy’ (18/2/20), and others describing the company’s operating style in less than complementary terms, it is little wonder Facebook is facing an epic public relations crisis. Even in neighbouring New Zealand, where commentary can be less virulent, we saw Duncan Greive (2021), host of media podcast The Fold, describe Facebook as operating like a ‘stubborn mule’ (Quoted on Stuff 18/2/21). COMMUNICATION RESEARCH AND PRACTICE 2021, VOL. 7, NO. 1, 1–5 https://doi.org/10.1080/22041451.2021.1894702