Experts are warning that Meta’s decision to ban news access on its platforms in Canada is a significant error that could harm journalism and contribute to the spread of misinformation and fake news.
The company made the announcement on Tuesday, stating that they are in the process of ending news access on Facebook and Instagram for Canadian users.
This action was taken in response to the enactment of the Online News Act, a new law designed to support Canadian journalism outlets by requiring companies like Meta and Alphabet, Google’s parent company, to contribute financially.
The company has referred to the legislation, known as Bill C-18, which was passed on June 18, as “unworkable” and argues that complying with the law requires them to “end news availability for people in Canada.”
Some Canadian Instagram and Facebook users are now unable to share links to news articles on those platforms, including articles from non-Canadian sources like The Guardian, The Washington Post, The New York Times, and Al Jazeera Afrique.
Earlier this year, Google also announced plans to remove links from search results but has yet to follow through. It remains uncertain whether other platforms such as Twitter and Bing will follow Meta’s lead.
Media experts warn that this move could create a void that will be filled by peddlers of disinformation.
Laura Hazard Owen of Harvard’s Nieman Lab wrote, “The end result could be Meta removing access to almost all legitimate news organizations but leaving up links to news stories from disreputable outlets or blogs and other one-person operations.”
Law professor Michael Geist, the Canada Research Chair in internet and e-commerce law at the University of Ottawa, expressed concerns about the impact of this policy on Canadian media, particularly small and independent outlets that rely on social media for readership. He characterized this policy as a disaster.
Timothy Caulfield, a professor at the University of Alberta who researches health and science misinformation, highlighted the already significant role that social media and online forums play in spreading unproven therapies and conspiracy theories about conventional medicine.
Caulfield stated, “There’s a large body of evidence now that tells us that misinformation spread online about health does real harm. The anti-vax nonsense is just one example.” He emphasized that if credible content decreases, the problem will only worsen.
There are concerns that politics and elections may also be impacted by this decision. Meta had previously announced plans to invest in election integrity following the 2016 US election, which saw Donald Trump elected.
Ahmed Al-Rawi, the head of the Disinformation Project at Simon Fraser University, argued that limiting news access on platforms like Facebook and Instagram compromises these investment efforts.
Al-Rawi questioned, “News is one of the main pillars of democracy. If you don’t allow factual news to be disseminated on your platform, why do you claim to be serving the public good?” He also warned that the inability to link to news articles may encourage the sharing of screenshots, which can easily be manipulated using image-editing software or AI technologies.
Additionally, the inability for users to verify news by vetting links within the platforms could contribute to the proliferation of fake news. Al-Rawi pointed out that Meta only has a relatively small fact-checking team in Canada.
Furthermore, Al-Rawi highlighted the irony that Canadian federal parties, including the ruling Liberals who were responsible for Bill C-18, continue to spend on Facebook ads despite the platform’s restrictions on news access.
Geist also criticized the Canadian government for downplaying the risks and ignoring the potential consequences of this decision. He argued that now that the law is in effect, the government and Meta will need to evaluate the value of links and consider how other countries may view the Canadian situation as a precedent.
Geist concluded, “There are no winners here. It’s a lose-lose-lose situation.”