Posts

twitter

Elon Musk Says X ‘May Fail’ 

Elon Musk said in a post on X, formally known as Twitter, that the social media may fail after a glitch caused pictures posted before December 2014 to be deleted.

“The sad truth is that there are no great ‘social networks’ right now. We may fail, as so many have predicted, but we will try our best to make there be at least one.”

Embed from Getty Images

Over the weekend, a glitch on the platform caused all pictures and links on posts for pictures and videos to be removed if they were posted before December 2014. 

The posts made before December 2014 showed broken links instead of the pictures and videos that were previously there. 

Many users noticed the glitch almost immediately after. Technologist Tom Coates referred to the glitch as an “epic vandalism by Musk,” suggesting that it could’ve been a cost-saving exercise. 

One of the biggest tweets that suffered from the glitch was the famous Oscar selfie from 2014 posted by Ellen DeGeneres. The picture became the platform’s most retweeted photo, with more than 2 million shares on the social network. 

Some X users are speculating that the glitch was caused by an effort to save money on storage data, while others have said the 2016 changes where “enhanced URL enrichment” was implemented, could’ve attributed, as the change was meant to show previews for linked websites and attachments beyond the company’s previous 140 character limit, according to The Verge

Embed from Getty Images

This particular malfunction also came after reports last week that suggested access from X to other social networks had been slowed down. The 5-second delay that users reported also appeared on links to news sites. 

Earlier this year, X users also experienced a daily limit on the amount of tweets they could see in a day while direct messages temporarily stopped working. The company has since apologized for this “glitch” and others that left users locked out of their accounts. 

Since Musk took over the platform, thousands of jobs have been cut, massively reducing the workforce since November. 

Musk’s initial plans for the platform were to cut down on costs, however, he reported a 50% drop in advertising revenue last month, as well as heavy debt. 

Currently, X faces annual interest payments of $1.5 billion due to the debt it took on when Musk acquired the platform for $44 billion.

npr

NPR Quits Twitter After Being Labeled ‘State-Affiliated Media’

NPR will no longer post on its 52 Twitter accounts after Musk categorized the private news organization as “U.S. state-affiliated media.” The move equated NPR, which receives less than 1% of its funding from the government, with Russia’s RT and China’s Xinhua propaganda outlets.

NPR, which stands for “National Public Radio,” issued a statement on Wednesday saying the mislabeling damages the media organization’s credibility with readers.

“NPR’s organizational accounts will no longer be active on Twitter because the platform is taking actions that undermine our credibility by falsely implying that we are not editorially independent. We are not putting our journalism on platforms that have demonstrated an interest in undermining our credibility and the public’s understanding of our editorial independence.”

In a letter to staff on Wednesday, NPR CEO John Lansing commented on the risks posed by Twitter’s decision.

“Actions by Twitter or other social media companies to tarnish the independence of any public media institution are exceptionally harmful and set a dangerous precedent.”

After being questioned by NPR tech reporter Bobby Allyn on how NPR functioned, Musk, who acquired Twitter for $44 billion last fall, admitted that he may have gotten it wrong. The Twitter account for NPR was then recategorized as “government-funded media.”

Embed from Getty Images

The news organization asserted that this new label was still misleading since NPR is a private, nonprofit company with editorial independence. Less than 1% of its $300 million annual budget comes from the federally funded Corporation for Public Broadcasting.

Musk also applied the “government-funded media” label to the BBC Twitter account. Later, in an interview with the broadcaster, he shared that he may change the label to “publicly funded” media.

Right-wing and conservative commentators have long claimed that NPR and its affiliates’ content is biased toward the left and more progressive ideologies. Meanwhile, Musk has also been accused of allowing the proliferation of far-right extremists on Twitter.

Musk, who describes himself as a free-speech absolutist, removed the New York Times’ blue check mark earlier this month after the paper refused to pay for one.

Formerly, the badges indicated that Twitter had confirmed the identity of a news outlet, government agency or public figure. They are now available for a subscription fee once a month.

“We aren’t planning to pay the monthly fee for check mark status for our institutional Twitter accounts,” the New York Times said in a statement. “We also will not reimburse reporters for Twitter Blue for personal accounts, except in rare instances where this status would be essential for reporting purposes.”

Embed from Getty Images

In his new interview with the BBC, Musk said he hoped to make information on Twitter as accurate as possible but acknowledged that media companies are often critical of him.

“I’ve been under constant attack. It’s not like I have a stone-cold heart or anything. If you’re under constant criticism or attack and that gets fed to you, including through Twitter – it’s rough, you know.”

BBC also asked Musk if he was concerned about the spread of misinformation due to longstanding media organizations, such as the New York Times, being stripped of their verification badges.

“I must confess to some delight in removing the verification badge from the New York Times,” Musk said. “Anyway, they’re still alive and well so they’re doing well.”

NPR is the first major news organization to stop using the platform. In an email to NPR employees, Lansing stated that it was ultimately up to them to decide if they would like to keep using Twitter on their personal accounts.

“It would be a disservice to the serious work you all do here to continue to share it on a platform that is associating the federal charter for public media with an abandoning of editorial independence or standards.”

iphone

First-generation iPhone Set to Sell for $50,000 at Auction

An unopened, factory-sealed 2007 first-generation iPhone went up for auction on Thursday. It is estimated to be worth around $50,000.

The owner of the phone, cosmetic tattoo artist Karen Green, appeared on the daytime television program “The Doctor & The Diva” in 2019 and said she was gifted the iPhone around its release but never broke the seal. At the time, she was happy with her current device. An appraiser on the show valued the phone at $5,000 at the time.

LCG Auctions listed Green’s phone with an opening bid of $2,500. In October 2022, another first-generation iPhone was auctioned off for over $39,000. The listing says the phone is almost 16 years old.

“The phone presents magnificently, showcasing sharp corners front and back, rich color, and ‘case fresh’ features.  The labels on the reverse are pristine beneath the seal, and shelf wear is minimal.  This is the first original iPhone in acceptable condition to hit the auction block since the record-breaking sale in October.  A truly remarkable piece with great appeal to both collectors and investors alike.”

The first Apple iPhone originally sold for $599 and offered a 3.5-inch screen, 2-megapixel camera, 4GB or 8GB of storage, internet access and iTunes. There was no app store, and it could only be used on AT&T’s 2G network. Despite its limitations, it was groundbreaking and was named Time’s Invention of the Year in 2007.

Embed from Getty Images

Lev Grossman, the writer of the Time magazine article that awarded the phone with that title, accurately predicted that the iPhone would continue to rise in popularity for years to come.

“The iPhone has sold enough units—more than 1.4 million at press time—that it’ll be around for a while, and with all that room to develop and its infinitely updatable, all-software interface, the iPhone is built to evolve. Look at the iPod of six years ago. That monochrome interface! That clunky touch wheel! It looks like something a caveman whittled from a piece of flint using another piece of flint. Now imagine something that’s going to make the iPhone look that primitive. You’ll have one in a few years. It’ll be very cool. And it’ll be even cheaper.”

The introduction of the iPhone and smartphones more broadly altered so many facets of modern daily life. Technology has changed how we interact with one another socially and professionally. Many companies saw their popularity decline due to the rise of smartphones; this included manufacturers of camcorders, MP3 players, flip phones, and other portable electronic devices. However, the iPhone simultaneously spawned other businesses and startups.

Embed from Getty Images

At the 2007 Macworld expo, former Apple co-founder and former CEO Steve Jobs began his keynote address with the words, “We’re going to make some history together today.” Jobs promised the attendees that the new smartphone was a “revolutionary mobile phone” that would include an iPod and would be able to communicate with the internet. The ability to use a phone as a full-fledged internet browser was a game-changer.

Of all the smartphones offered today, Apple’s iPhone still holds the largest share of the market at 28.43%. Unsurprisingly, some collectors want the original iPhone that ushered in a new era of communication and discovery.

The auction will be open until February 19 for bidders.

Man in Prison

American Journalist Danny Fenster Sentenced To 11 Years In Prison In Myanmar

A military court in Myanmar has sentenced Danny Fenster, a 37-year-old American journalist from Detroit, to 11 years in prison, according to a statement from his lawyer. Fester has been detained in Myanmar for more than 5 months now. 

Fester was denied bail and has been held in Insein Prison since his arrest on May 24th. Than Zaw Aung, Fester’s lawyer, claimed Fester was found guilty this week of three charges brought against him by the Myanmar military, which seized control of the country in a coup back in February. 

The charges against Fester include breaches, unlawful association with an illegal group, and incitement under section 505a of Myanmar’s Penal Code; which makes it a crime to publish or circulate comments that may “cause fear or spread false news.”

Embed from Getty Images

About 100 journalists have been detained in the country since the coup, and about 30 remain behind bars. Fester’s lawyer also announced that he has now been hit with two new criminal charges under the nation’s sedition and terrorism laws, which carries a maximum sentence of life in prison. 

The new charges were made under Section 124a of Myanmer’s Penal Code, which mandates seven to 20 years in prison for attempting to bring hatred, contempt or disaffection toward the government or military.

The other charge is under “Section 50a of the Counter Terrorism Law, which makes it a crime to have contact with officially designated ‘terrorist’ groups. Under the terrorism charge, Fenster could face a minimum of 10 years in prison and a maximum of life in prison if convicted,” according to his lawyer and Myanmar’s sentencing guidelines.

Fester was initially arrested at Yangon International Airport while trying to leave the country to visit his family in the US. It was unclear why the charges were brought against the former managing editor of Frontier Myanmer. 

Embed from Getty Images

Frontier Myanmar said in a statement posted on Facebook it was “deeply disappointed at the sentencing. Everyone at Frontier is disappointed and frustrated at this decision. We just want to see Danny released as soon as possible so he can go home to his family,” said Thomas Keen, Frontier’s Editor-in-Chief.

Frontier Myanmar said the “charges were based on the allegation that Fenster was working for banned media outlet Myanmar Now in the aftermath of the military coup. But Fenster had resigned from Myanmar Now in July 2020, and at the time of his arrest in May 2021 had been working with Frontier for more than nine months.”

“There is absolutely no basis to convict Danny of these charges. His legal team clearly demonstrated to the court that he had resigned from Myanmar Now and was working for Frontier from the middle of last year,” said Kean.

Phil Robertson, deputy Asia director at Human Rights Watch, said the sentence was a “travesty of justice executed by a kangaroo court operating at the beck and call of the Myanmar military junta.”

“The rationale for this outrageous, rights abusing sentence is really twofold: To intimidate all remaining journalists inside Myanmar by punishing Fenster this way, while at the same time sending a message to the US that the Tatmadaw generals don’t appreciate being hit with economic sanctions and can bite back with hostage diplomacy,” Robertson said.

“Journalism is not a crime, and it shouldn’t be treated that way — meaning that Danny Fenster and the many Burmese journalists still behind bars should urgently be freed.”

Almost 80% Of Americans Have Been Exposed To Misinformation Online Regarding Covid-19, Survey Says

Between social media and the plethora of news outlets reporting on the Covid-19 pandemic, many Americans aren’t sure what information to believe. New data from the Kaiser Family Foundation found that nearly 80% of Americans surveyed said they had heard of at least one of the falsehoods perpetuated by online misinformation and either believed it, or were unsure whether or not it was true. 

“Most commonly, six in ten adults have heard that the government is exaggerating the number of Covid-19 deaths by counting deaths due to other factors such as coronavirus deaths and either believe this to be true (38%) or aren’t sure if it’s true or false (22%).”

Embed from Getty Images

“One-third of respondents believe or are unsure whether deaths due to the Covid-19 vaccine are being intentionally hidden by the government (35%), and about three in ten each believe or are unsure whether Covid-19 vaccines have been shown to cause infertility (31%) or whether Ivermectin is a safe and effective treatment for COVID-19 (28%),” the authors wrote.

The survey also found that “between a fifth and a quarter of the public believe or are unsure whether the vaccines can give you COVID-19 (25%), contain a microchip (24%), or can change your DNA (21%).”

Outlandish ideas such as vaccine microchips, trackers, or changes to DNA have been reported by “trusted” media outlets and have made a vast impact on many Americans in their choice to get vaccinated or not. 

“People’s trusted news sources are correlated with their belief in COVID-19 misinformation. At least a third of those who trust information from CNN, MSNBC, network news, NPR, and local television news do not believe any of the eight false statements, while small shares (between 11% and 16%) believe or are unsure about at least four of the eight false statements.”

Embed from Getty Images

These results prove that traditional sources of media are helping people separate facts from falsehoods. However, Republicans have made it clear that sources such as CNN and NPR are not to be trusted. 

The survey found that “nearly 4 in 10 of those who trust Fox News (36%) and One America News (37%), and nearly half (46%) of those who trust Newsmax, saying they believe or are unsure about at least half of the eight false statements.”

The researchers cautioned, however, that “whether this is because people are exposed to misinformation from those news sources, or whether the types of people who choose those news sources are the same ones who are pre-disposed to believe certain types of misinformation for other reasons, is beyond the scope of the analysis.”

Post reporter Aaron Blake followed up with Kaiser and concluded that the overall numbers “obscure just how ripe the right is for this kind of misinformation. That’s because, “in most cases, if you exclude Republicans who haven’t heard the claims and focus on just who is familiar with them, a majority of them actually believe the claims.”

David Leonhardt of The New York Times wrote “Covid vaccines are remarkably effective at preventing severe Covid, and almost 40 percent of Republican adults remain unvaccinated, compared with about 10 percent of Democratic adults. In the Kaiser research, unvaccinated adults were more likely than vaccinated adults to believe four or more of the eight false statements.”

Climate Experts Worried About Misinformation On Fox News’ 24-Hour Weather Channel 

Fox News Media announced that they would be launching their own weather channel this year, an announcement that has many climate experts worried considering how often Fox News reporters criticize science and spreads misinformation regarding climate change. 

Fox Weather will be “a 24-hour channel devoted to all things meteorological, providing cutting-edge display technology with forecasting experts surrounding every major weather event,” according to the press release from Fox Media. 

Embed from Getty Images

Over the years, hosts on Fox News have consistently undermined the idea that climate change caused by human activity is an actual issue worth fighting for. So the fact that the same company that owns that outlet which hires journalists who ignore the actual scientific facts of what global warming is, is creating a weather channel, has many worried. 

“Fox News has access to and is highly trusted by a wide range of conservative Americans – which is precisely the audience that least well understands the serious threats that climate change poses to the safety, security and health of all Americans,” said Edward Maibach, director of George Mason University’s Center for Climate Change Communication.

“If Fox chooses to inform viewers about the realities of climate change and its impacts on the weather, it could be a game changer. Conversely, if it opts to perpetuate misinformation to advance political goals, it will be a huge disservice to all Americans.”

Last year Fox News host Tucker Carlson discussed how all the forest and wildfires the west coast has endured within the past two years were not caused by climate change. Carlson’s colleague Laura Ingraham also doubled-down on this ideology by insisting that the planet has a “natural cycle of warming, and climate activists like Greta Thunberg have been brainwashed, and the left’s obsession with climate is a political tool.” 

Embed from Getty Images

“The danger of Fox News running a weather channel is that if they pervert news about the weather anything like how they’ve perverted news about climate change and energy politics, millions of Americans will be further misled about this crisis,” said Geoffrey Supran, research fellow at Harvard University’s department of the history of science.

“It’s been shown that the most important predictors of public support for climate action are understanding that this crisis is real, human-caused, serious and solvable.”

“If Fox News Media’s weather channel downplays the links between global warming and extreme weather, it will only solidify their viewers’ existing biases against climate action. Fox News has been a powerful engine of climate misinformation for years – so powerful, in fact, that its influence has been named the ‘Fox News Effect’,” Maibach said.

One of our studies showed that before Fox News began its attack on the Green New Deal, most conservatives supported its core policy proposals. Six months later – after Fox had relentlessly attacked it and its sponsors – support for those proposals dropped to near zero among frequent Fox viewers.”

“I don’t expect that Fox News will change its ways or its views about climate change anytime soon, but Fox Weather has the opportunity to get the facts right. Let’s hope it chooses to,” Maibach said.

New York Times

New York Times Outs Tucker Carlson As Top Anonymous Source 

The New York Times has outed Fox News host Tucker Carlson as a frequently used anonymous source for information. Carlson is known for regularly attacking and insulting the media on his show for the spreading of misinformation and “fake news.” 

Carlson often names journalists and major media outlets by name in his nightly call outs in which he claims most of the media is made up of liberal individuals who want to discredit former president Donald Trump and his supporters. Carlson and other major figureheads in the media have created a major wave of threats and harassment aimed at journalists simply reporting on the facts; facts that our former president and his supporters were known for ignoring. 

Embed from Getty Images

“Journalists are cringing animals who are not worthy of respect,” Carlson claimed recently. 

Ben Smith is the Times media columnist who wrote that it was an “open secret” in Washington that Carlson frequently shared gossip and information to multiple news outlets that he would go on to insult on his show. 

Several journalist sources and non-Times organizations told Smith about all the information Carlson has revealed to them in the past, including multiple stories about Trump that painted him in an unflattering light. He also would share information about the internal politics of Fox News. 

Embed from Getty Images

“In Trump’s Washington, Tucker Carlson is a primary supersecret source. I know this because I know what he has told me, and I can track his exquisite, too-good-not-to-be-true gossip through unsourced reports and as it often emerges into accepted wisdom.”

Carlson has worked tirelessly to paint himself as a Fox News host with little respect for journalists and opposing opinions. He’s spoken out frequently about his distaste for liberals and their “agenda.” 

Carlson is also one of the biggest media voices to lend his support to Trump throughout the past year. He often supported Trump’s baseless claims of a fraudulent election, as well as crucial information regarding the Covid-19 pandemic. 

He recently went on about how the January 6th Capitol riot was a part of an FBI plot to overthrow Trump. He has also continuously spewed harmful misinformation regarding the Covid-19 vaccines which has definitely led to an increase in the anti-vaccination movement.

Facebook To Restore News Sharing Services In Australia 

Facebook announced that it will be restoring all news pages in Australia after the platform and Australian government agreed to certain changes within the media coding that would grant greater control over what appears on the platform from both parties. 

Facebook and the Australian government have been at odds for months now. Initially Australia was attempting to pass legislation that would require Facebook and Google to pay news and media outlets for their content before they’re able to share it across their platforms. “The initial version of the legislation would have allowed media outlets to bargain either individually or collectively with Facebook and Google — and to enter binding arbitration if the parties couldn’t reach an agreement,” according to reports

Embed from Getty Images

This week the Australian government also released a statement in which they claimed they would “amend the code to include a provision that must take into account whether a digital platform has made a significant contribution to the sustainability of the Australian news industry through reaching commercial agreements with news media businesses.” 

Campbell Brown is Facebook’s vice president for global news partnerships who recently spoke with the media regarding the new deal. 

“The government has clarified Facebook will retain the ability to decide if news appears on the platform so that we won’t automatically be subject to forced negotiation.” 

Brown continued to explain that the “agreement will allow Facebook to support the publishers they choose to, including small and local publishers. Our company will also be restoring the news on Facebook in Australia in the coming days.” 

Embed from Getty Images

Brown is of course referring to Facebook’s decision last week to remove all news articles and services from the platform, barring Australians from finding or sharing news. This move not only impacted the thousands of media publishers on Facebook, but government agencies and services as well. The removal of media outlets indirectly removed pages for emergency government services and charities, leaving many Australians who are dependent on those services without the ability to access them. 

Facebook’s recent decision to restore the news came after the Australian Senate discussed the recent media laws passed that allowed the platform to take away so many essential services and pages. 

“It’s always been our intention to support journalism in Australia and around the world, and we’ll continue to invest in news globally, and resist efforts by media conglomerates to advance regulatory frameworks that do not take account of the true value exchange between publishers and platforms like Facebook,” Brown explained. 

Google, on the other hand, has already been attempting to surpass the new legislation by partnering with some of Australia’s largest media organizations. All of these deals are currently unconfirmed, but will likely be revealed in the coming weeks.

Britney Spears Star

Britney Spears’s Conservatorship Case Heading Back To Court 

The legal battle over Britney Spears’s finances and conservatorship is heading back to Los Angeles court this Thursday, just days after a new Hulu documentary sparked widespread outrage over the controversial guardianship the pop star has been living under that is typically only for elderly individuals with dementia or other cognitive issues that make them unfit to be in control of their own finances. 

Jamie Spears, the pop stars father, maintains control over her estate, career, finances, social media, medical treatments, and a slew of other aspects of her personal life; he’s also had this control for the past 13 years, so any career endeavors that Spears has endured within that time, including her Las Vegas residency, were not her decision. 

Lawyers for Spears filed last year to have Jamie removed as conservator, arguing that she was “afraid of her father” and would be refusing to resume her performing career while he still had control over it. In November a judge refused to remove Jamie but added Bessemer Trust as co-conservator and corporate fiduciary. This Thursday’s hearing will include a discussion of what role the two conservators will play in overseeing Spears’s estate. 

Embed from Getty Images

Supporters of Britney Spears attend the #FreeBritney Protest Outside Los Angeles

Conservatorship by definition is “a form of court-appointed guardianship that is typically used for elderly and infirm people, or others who can’t make decisions for themselves, the arrangement is often temporary.” 

The release of Framing Britney Spears, a New York Times-produced documentary, has now “raised questions about the fraught process that led the courts to institute the conservatorship, Jamie’s role as a conservator, the motives of Spears’s entourage in keeping the arrangement in place and the media’s treatment of the star.”

The documentary followed Spears’s rise to fame and the intense abuse she faced by paparazzi, the media, and fans as well. The approval of her conservatorship was partially a result of the American media painting Britney to be mentally unstable. The documentary also depicted Jamie as an absent father up until he took on the conservatorship in 2008, when he gained complete control over her finances. 

The biggest question raised by the documentary is how can someone who the court deems unstable enough to be in control over basically every aspect of her personal life be stable enough to go on multiple tours, perform a Las Vegas residency, work as a judge on X-Factor, etc. The amount that Britney has done in her career within the past decade does not line up with an individual unfit to be in control of their own finances. 

Embed from Getty Images

American pop culture, the media, and the entertainment industry in general is now being analyzed with a fine-tooth comb, specifically over how it treats female performers and makes light of their struggles. The film also featured the #FreeBritney movement, “a fan-led campaign advocating for the singer to be freed from conservatorship and from her father’s control. Organizers said this week they hoped the reaction to the film would put pressure on the courts to restore the singer’s independence,” according to the Times. 

 Leanne Simmons, a #FreeBritney advocate who was featured in the documentary, told the press recently that the documentary “has lit a fire under all of us to keep pushing, because we do have that support from the general public. I work in post production in the film industry, and have been closely following the court case and plan to attend the Thursday hearing in person. 

“We’ve been trying to get this message across for so many years, and to essentially have the narrative change overnight is pretty extraordinary. The documentary was hard to watch. It brought me back to that moment of watching this in realtime in 2007. I felt so frustrated back then like no one was listening to her, or to me when I would try to defend her. I can’t believe it took this long and this documentary for people to realize that it was always wrong.”

Spears publicly acknowledged the #FreeBritney movement for the first time last year through her lawyer in court, when he claimed that Britney was “trying to regain some measure of personal autonomy, and she welcomes and appreciates the informed support of her many fans.”

Google Search Page

Google Threatening To Shut Down Search Engine In Australia 

Google is currently claiming that it will shut down its search engine in Australia if a controversial bill that’s designed to benefit the news and media becomes law. This Friday, Australia’s Managing Director Mel Silva spoke at a Senate Hearing in Canberra in which they claimed that the “draft legislation remains unworkable and would be breaking the way millions of users searched for content online.” 

“If this version of the Code were to become law, it would give us no real choice but to stop making Google Search available in Australia. That would be a bad outcome not just for us, but for the Australian people, media diversity and small businesses who use Google Search. Right now Google’s main concern with the proposal is that it would require payments simply for links and snippets just to news results in Search. The free service we offer Australian users, and our business model, has been built on the ability to link freely between websites,” Silva told lawmakers

Embed from Getty Images

Google and Facebook have long been fighting with publishers over how they display their content, while media companies believe that these tech giants should be paying them for the displays. Critics believe that based on how huge both Google and Facebook are, and since they dominate the online advertising business anyway, that they should realize that news publishers are left to scramble for advertising. 

If passed the new legislation would allow certain media outlets to “bargain either individually or collectively with Facebook and Google — and to enter arbitration if the parties can’t reach an agreement within three months,” according to the Australian Competition and Consumer Commission. 

Australian Prime Minister Scott Morrison recently called out Google for their threats and overconfidence in their ability to impact politics.

Embed from Getty Images

“Let me be clear. Australia makes our rules for things you can do in Australia. It’s done by our government and that’s how things work here in Australia and people who want to work with that in Australia, you’re very welcome. But we don’t respond to threats.”

Google has yet to respond to Morrison’s claims, but if one thigns for sure, both Google and Facebook have been adamantly opposed to the code since its introduction in Australia last summer. In the same Senate hearing that Silva spoke at, Simon Milner, Facebook;s vice president of public policy for Asia Pacific, said that the company could “ultimately block news content in Australia if they wanted.”

Milner told lawmakers “there was already a deterrent effect of this law on investment in the Australian news industry. Sir Tim Berners-Lee in the UK said this precedent set by this law could ‘make the web unworkable around the world.’”

Regulators claim that this legislation is necessary because it would level the playing field for the news media in Australia, as a majority of newsrooms across the country have temporarily shut down, or reduced their service. The case is currently ongoing, and only time will tell what sort of negotiations emerge from both Google/Facebook, and Australia’s end.