Will be curious to see how this comment ages in a year.
I'm of the view that it's Google and Meta that are in trouble here. If they don't want to pay for quality news sources their content continues to noticeably degrade and become less attractive for use. They're likely trying to play hard ball with Canada and Australia because the markets are comparatively small. If the EU or the US see merit in this approach the tech companies are really going to struggle.
Facebook without news content will become more attractive, not less. It was a mistake for them to emphasize news content in the first place; while it might have driven a temporary increase in user engagement it devalued the product as a social network.
The news sites already tried it Google's way for more than a decade, and it isn't working for them. It only works for Google.
As someone clearly entrenched in the tech echo chamber, it will come as a surprise for you to learn that there are many news organizations that do not give their content away for free on the internet.
Some have paywalls. Some require paid apps. Some are -shudder- only available as dead trees.
Many of them are thriving.
My wife pays upwards of $2,000/year for a publication that is not available in any form on the internet. It has offices and reporters in a dozen cities around the world, and continues to grow.
It, and others like it, don't need to suckle at the teat of Google for pennies.
I'm of the view that it's Google and Meta that are in trouble here. If they don't want to pay for quality news sources their content continues to noticeably degrade and become less attractive for use. They're likely trying to play hard ball with Canada and Australia because the markets are comparatively small. If the EU or the US see merit in this approach the tech companies are really going to struggle.