Meta has made this a lot clear, by ending its content material offers with publishers, reducing its funding into information initiatives like its devoted Information Tab, Prompt Articles and newsletters, and even immediately noting that it’s de-prioritizing political information in-stream.

Which is why the newest push within the US to drive Meta to pay extra to information publishers appears significantly ill-timed.

This week, reviews have steered that the controversial ‘Journalism Competitors and Preservation Act (JCPA) has been added to the annual protection authorization invoice, which may see it carried into legislation within the new 12 months.

The JCPA would facilitate an exemption below US antitrust legislation that might allow US information retailers to collectively cut price with social media platforms with a view to negotiate a bigger share of advert income, in alternate for the usage of their content material – i.e. it will drive Meta to pay for hyperlinks to information content material in its apps.

Which is now, and all the time has been a controversial coverage method. However with the Australian Treasury Division not too long ago reporting that its related Media Bargaining Code has been a hit, and has re-directed hundreds of thousands into the native media market, different nations are actually taking a more in-depth look – with New Zealand now additionally contemplating its personal Media Bargaining Code alongside related strains.

However once more, Meta in all probability doesn’t want information prefer it used to anymore, and it may lower it off completely in response. Which is strictly what Meta has threatened to do.

As per Meta:

“If Congress passes an ill-considered journalism invoice as a part of nationwide safety laws, we shall be pressured to think about eradicating information from our platform altogether moderately than undergo government-mandated negotiations that unfairly disregard any worth we offer to information retailers by elevated site visitors and subscriptions.”

Now, there’s a degree of posturing right here, and it appears unlikely that Meta would take away information content material completely. However that’s what it did in Australia final 12 months, amid negotiations over the media Bargaining invoice.

On the similar time, Australia’s media ecosphere is way smaller than the US. Would Meta actually transfer to dam all US information organizations from sharing content material in its apps – and if it did, what would that imply for engagement and interplay in every?

That is the important thing level of the talk. On one facet, media organizations argue that Meta generates a heap of engagement off the again of its reporting, which then constitutes a major chunk of its income, as a result of extra customers partaking extra typically means extra advertisements, and so forth.

However Meta says that information content material isn’t as huge a deal to it as publishers appear to assume – and as Meta notes, it views this as a extra reciprocal relationship, the place publishers use its apps to maximise attain, which in-turn helps them drive their enterprise.

And once more, Meta has been distancing itself from information content material increasingly more over time, and leaning right into a extra TikTok-like method of exhibiting customers video clips and entertaining posts, primarily based on AI-fueled suggestions for every consumer.

Given this, may Meta now be ready to really lower off information publishers completely, with out impacting its income efficiency?

You possibly can guess that, with Meta asserting main cutbacks, it’s not going to be giving up any income simply.

It’s early days, however this may very well be one to look at, as Meta doubtlessly heads for a stand-off with publishers, in a number of areas, within the new 12 months.