California State Capitol on March 11, 2022. (Photo: Kevin Sanders for California Globe).
Google Announces Block to California-Based News Links From Searches in Protest of Impending Bill
‘Only the largest outlets would benefit from the bill’
By Evan Symon, April 12, 2024 5:19 pm
Google announced on Friday that they would start blocking California-based news article links for a limited number of users in protest of a bill advancing in the Assembly that, if passed, would require big tech companies to pay a fee to news outlets for using or posting articles and other local news content.
Assembly Bill 886, authored by Assemblywoman Buffy Wicks (D-Oakland), would specifically have digital advertising companies, such as Google or Facebook, pay for content they use from media outlets. The bill, also known as the California Journalism Preservation Act (CJPA), would pay a “journalism usage fee” to media outlet owners each time local news articles are used by the companies that also sell advertising along with it. Publishers would receive the funds and would then need to invest at least 70% back into funding journalism jobs, such as paying journalists or creating new journalism positions.
Introduced early least year, AB 886 quickly gained support in Sacramento with many agreeing with Wicks over compensating news outlets for having articles used online given the significant decline of local newspaper outlets in California in the past decade, largely attributed to a huge loss of print advertising. As newspaper advertising revenues have sunk a total of 66% more, with media outlet employees decreasing 44%, lawmakers voted for the bill to protect media outlets in the changing market, as it is projected that regular online advertising not make up for the loss of print advertising for the foreseeable future.
Google, Meta, and other tech companies opposed AB 886 heavily, with Meta even coming out and saying that should the bill imposing journalism usage fees pass, they would remove all news content from California on their sites. That got the attention of lawmakers. While the bill did pass the Assembly 55-6 with 19 abstentions in the House in Jun 2023, it didn’t move much further, with all the rest of their hearings in the Senate being canceled for the year.
However, with the bill threatening to come back this year, Google announced on Friday that they would be removing links to California news websites to measure the impact of the potential legislation within a small number of Californian users for a short period of time. Google argued their actions in a statement on Friday, saying that the CJPA would leave significant changes on Google and what they could offer Californian users, as well as have some of the money go to larger companies who operate news websites under a “ghost paper” model.
Google’s Announcement
“A pending bill in the California state legislature, the California Journalism Preservation Act (CJPA), would create a “link tax” that would require Google to pay for simply connecting Californians to news articles,” said Google in a statement on Friday. “We have long said that this is the wrong approach to supporting journalism. If passed, CJPA may result in significant changes to the services we can offer Californians and the traffic we can provide to California publishers.
“By helping people find news stories, we help publishers of all sizes grow their audiences at no cost to them. CJPA would up-end that model. It would favor media conglomerates and hedge funds—who’ve been lobbying for this bill—and could use funds from CJPA to continue to buy up local California newspapers, strip them of journalists, and create more ghost papers that operate with a skeleton crew to produce only low-cost, and often low-quality, content. CJPA would also put small publishers at a disadvantage and limit consumers’ access to a diverse local media ecosystem.”
“As we’ve shared when other countries have considered similar proposals, the uncapped financial exposure created by CJPA would be unworkable. If enacted, CJPA in its current form would create a level of business uncertainty that no company could accept. To prepare for possible CJPA implications, we are beginning a short-term test for a small percentage of California users. The testing process involves removing links to California news websites, potentially covered by CJPA, to measure the impact of the legislation on our product experience. Until there’s clarity on California’s regulatory environment, we’re also pausing further investments in the California news ecosystem, including new partnerships through Google News Showcase, our product and licensing program for news organizations, and planned expansions of the Google News Initiative.”
While Google did offer some alternatives, like focusing on different ways that users get their news, nothing was made clear. In addition, Google’s stance on purposefully blocking sites led to much criticism that Google would be killing local and community news outlets through their actions, and that they had been just leveraging advertising dollars against that.
As of Friday afternoon, Wicks and other supporters had yet to respond to Google’s decision. However, many smaller outlets, as well as media experts have actually sided with Google. While they said that Google shouldn’t be blocking California media sites, they said that the bill itself would only benefit larger outlets while ignoring smaller and more local outlets, the latter of which that are the most at-risk in California.
“Google went a little too far in actually blocking some news links from some users, but they weren’t wrong in that the bill has problems,” explained online advertising consultant Darren Adams to the Globe. “Only the largest outlets would benefit from the bill. Smaller and independent outlets want to be covered more, but the bill just would not give them a fair slice of that pie, AB 886 would largely kill local news. Googles actions will also harm outlets, but this is short term. The sad thing is that smaller outlets are caught in the middle of all this. They want increased revenue, but also don’t want to be squeezed out of search results. They get a lot of clicks through Google searches and from social media links. And all of this is just so overwhelming.”
As of Friday afternoon, Google has yet to give any exact figures on how many users in California are to be affected.
- Gov. Newsom Buys $9 Million House in Marin County - November 16, 2024
- California Republican Totals For President, Senate Highest Now In Decades - November 15, 2024
- Michelle Steel, Derek Tran Separated by 300 Votes As 45th House Race Remains Uncalled - November 15, 2024
RELATED ARTICLES
-
January 20, 2021 -
June 24, 2019 -
when did google become god?
When you got that “Free e mail”.
Then that “Free search engine”
Then that “Free browser”.
Now you cannot delete Google from your computer no matter how hard you try. It claws itself back in, sucking your digital blood.
Maybe it would be a good thing if Google halted all “news” content in California if the bill from creepy Democrat Assemblywoman Buffy Wicks from the dystopian city of Oakland passes? Most of the “news” content from the legacy media is deep-state propaganda with a far left slant? No doubt Wicks expects a big payout from big legacy media if it passes? This bill is a departure from the baby killing legislation that she usually pushes?
Maybe it would be a good thing if Google halted all “news” content in California if the bill from creepy Democrat Assemblywoman Buffy Wicks from the dystopian city of Oakland passes? Most of the “news” content from the legacy media is deep-state propaganda with a far left slant? No doubt Wicks expects a big payout from big legacy media if it passes?
In short, Google wants to take this article and distribute it, and then Hoover up the ad revenue generated by readers who click on this Globe article in The New York Times.
And to show “what could happen, should change happen” they gave our legislative cowards a sample of “What a nice bit of news coverage you USED TO HAVE!”
The original sin is Google, Meta, and the rest made their fortunes stripping personal data in exchange for “free” services and selling it, then hijacking the original content and attaching their own ads to it. Thus they could sell ads to vendors guaranteeing an interested audience based on stolen data. (AKA “Your target market”)
It has been bred out of us how wrong data theft really is.
Simple is the best example: “We stole everything and got rich. And if you mess with us no one will ever hear your name again.”
AB 886 from assembly member and Abortion Queen Buffy “Dead Shark Eyes” Wicks is a MUCH bigger deal than it first appeared to be on the surface when it was first introduced last year, as Evan Symon’s report has elaborated above. This is SO TWISTED, even for leftist legislators like Wicks. TJ is right that the motivation for Wicks (et al) in this bill is undoubtedly money from the big bad “legacy” media.
We must not let our hatred of Google — as Wicks and her ilk would like —- get in the way of seeing that they are correct in this case. What’s twisted is that Asm Wicks and Co. are pretending to save what they intend to kill. This is what they always do, of course, but it will be especially true for this. AB 886 is the OPPOSITE of an attempt to save or fairly compensate journalists or news outlets. In the end, the huge traitorous U.S. mega-media would prevail and everything else — smaller, independent, alternative media (think, e.g., the CA Globe) will be killed off. Just the way the leftists want it. Meta, Google, and the rest of ’em aren’t going to pay ANYONE to use content, they will simply eliminate it, as they have now told us they intend to do with regard to California.
Similar “Wolf in Sheep’s Clothing” laws in other countries have already caused the beginnings of “news deserts.” For example a “news desert” was already beginning in Canada (story is from last year, Aug 2023) because of Meta’s pull-out:
“Meta Begins Removing Canadians’ Access to All News on Facebook, Instagram”
https://www.dailywire.com/news/meta-begins-removing-canadians-access-to-all-news-on-facebook-instagram
Clearly this is NOT GOOD! And I understand the same thing has also been happening in Australia.
The lefties want this, that’s obvious. They will probably try to sneak AB 886 through somehow in the legislature in CA when no one is paying attention. We must keep this bill top of mind and make a lot of noise and NOT let that happen should AB 866 rear its ugly head again.
Showandtell, check out what Michael Shellenberger is exposing in Brazil: https://mail.google.com/mail/u/0/#inbox/FMfcgzGxSlNLllKDvCfHCnXKkbmmjbKq
Thanks so much for this, Fed Up. (!!!) Because I’m not signed up with Google I can’t sign in as requested at the link you provided, but is this what you are referring to?
https://www.instagram.com/shellenberger/reel/C5cRGd9xO38/
Wow.
Also, you can read the whole thing at his Shellenberger’s Substack if you’ve subscribed.
Yes, that’s the gist of it. I’m subscribed to Shellenberger’s Public News blog on Substack. There are rumors that Brazil is planning to arrest him while he’s there. If that happens I’m sure Biden will use the full power of the presidency to free Shellenberger (major sarcasm intended.)
Key excerpt:
“Since taking office, Lula [Brazil’s leftist President] has massively increased government funding of the mainstream news media, most of which are encouraging increased censorship.”
Fed Up, I’m still marveling at the great catch you made connecting Brazil et al to the CA bill, AB 886.
Talk about ‘cracking the case’!
Thank you again.
You’re welcome! We can hang together or hang separately. By the way, I voted for Shellenberger in the rigged/corrupt Newsom recall.
I also supported Shellenberger for Governor.
We’ll see what happens with the drama in Brazil re Shellenberger (God forbid).
And I just resubscribed to Shellenberger’s Substack (public@substack.com) which I had dropped a few months ago because I was overwhelmed by email at the time.
Joose-N-Indians in bed with FBI/CIA/NSA/NASA/DOJ/… consider us as nothing more than meat for their grinders — which we have become. Too late now, it’s over. “What’s good for G-M is good for America” except Google-Meta has replaced General Motors in this saying. Stop marrying, voting, having kids, and playing their game. Get a dog and a fishing pole. At least pot is legal now, so there’s that. Good-night and good-bye, America.
Love this bill, hate it, doesn’t matter. That is not the issue that has been revealed here. Google has just demonstrated how they and the other huge tech companies, such a Meta/Facebook, have been able to rig elections and control the public narrative. They aren’t even trying to hide it this time. The central question this brings up is, do we really want a few massive corporations to have so much power over us?
Contrary to other comments here, we do have a choice, and we CAN boot Google and the others out of our computers and our lives. I’ve done it. First, stop using their services. There are lots of other search engines, email providers, social media platforms, etc.. Second, while you can’t kick Google off of the websites you visit, by using open source operating systems (I use Linux Mint. The best is probably Qubes, but I don’t have new enough hardware yet), privacy oriented browsers such as Brave, and using VPN’s and apps like TOR for things you consider sensitive, you can put a big dent in their ability to track your browsing. If you want something to go away, you have to stop buying it.
Good ideas, thanks!