That it all happened in the blink of an eye is what makes the current quandary so head-spinning. A number publications have already pulled the plug, from digital startup The Outline to various local newspapers around the country, most recently three titles that are owned by the parent company of the Los Angeles Times. Announcements of salary reductions, furloughs, layoffs, and other belt-tightening measures have been coming so fast it’s hard to keep track of them all. Last week alone brought cuts to, among others, the L.A. Times, Vox Media, the Hollywood Reporter, ESPN, Fortune, and Condé Nast, which owns Vanity Fair, not to mention NPR’s dire warning that it is facing a budget deficit as high as $45 million. This week so far: Meredith Corp, Tribune Publishing, and Protocol, the Politico-affiliated tech-news website that launched less than three months ago. Across the Atlantic, downsizing is likewise taking hold at places like News UK and The Guardian. The New York Times has been keeping a running tally, and as of Tuesday, it was reporting that some “33,000 workers at news companies in the U.S. have been laid off, been furloughed or had their pay reduced.”
In a memo to staff on Friday announcing a variety of austerity moves, Vox Media CEO Jim Bankoff hit upon the unprecedented-ness of it all: “Because we operate in such a tumultuous industry, it’s tempting to lump in the economic carnage resulting from the COVID-19 pandemic with other events or crises that we’ve seen in the media business. This is clearly very different: while the severity of the pandemic’s effect varies across institutions and individual lives, it is universal, and no one is immune from its impact.”
Jim VandeHei, the CEO of Axios, offered a similar take. “For huge swaths of media, it’s not hyperbole to say it’s cataclysmic, worse than 2008,” he told me. “If you rely on retail and consumer ads, home delivery, ad exchanges, affiliate revenue, or physical events, you are screwed, at least for the short term. This is devastating to local news and traditional newspapers in particular—they started with several shrinking business lines that in some cases are literally evaporating before their eyes.” Any bright spots? “The big players, like the New York Times and Washington Post, and niche players like Axios, will be fine longterm,” VandeHei continued. “But all of us do physical events, which are dead until further notice, and rely on some advertisers who are pulling back until the economic damage is more clearly known. All of this sucks, broadly speaking, for the media and nation because the need and value of news you can trust has never been higher.”
Even at those well-positioned big players that VandeHei mentioned, like the Times and the Post, which are insulated by the massive digital subscription businesses they’ve developed in recent years, it’s not as if the mood is particularly upbeat. “It’s tough to see how the industry is being hammered, particularly when people need quality journalism more than ever,” said Meredith Kopit Levien, the Times’ chief operating officer.
Still, it’s not impossible to find optimism even in these most despairing of times. “You do wonder if certain types of media will come back from this,” said Nicholas Carlson, editor in chief of Business Insider, which also has a strong subscription component. (The company doesn’t anticipate any COVID-related cuts, but it won’t be able to hire as many people as it was planning to in 2020.) “We’ve been saying for 20 years that newspapers are dying, and now it looks like this could really be it, and that’s horrible. But people still need journalism, and the model for it is being developed. If people want or need information that they can’t get anywhere else, they will subscribe to what you’re doing. For those who are well capitalized and have diverse business models and are not too cost heavy, this is an environment for them to really fortify themselves and even flourish when things go back to normal.”
Business Insider, Carlson pointed out, got its start amid the 2008 financial crash. “Great companies are founded in these moments,” he said, “so I’m optimistic that there’s capital that can be moved into trying to figure that out.”
More Great Stories From Vanity Fair
— Does the King of the Coronavirus Contrarians Have a Case?
— In the COVID-19 Crisis, Warren Buffett Is Lying Low—And Bill Ackman Stepping Up
— Can You Beat COVID-19 Without a Lockdown? Sweden Is Trying
— With “Those We’ve Lost,” the Times Reprises Its 9/11 Storytelling Role
— How Long Will the Coronavirus Alternate Reality Last?
— From the Archive: The Plague Warriors Who Battled Ebola
Looking for more? Sign up for our daily Hive newsletter and never miss a story.
The B.C. government is putting its proposed online harms legislation on hold after reaching an agreement with some of the largest social media platforms to make people safer online.
Premier David Eby says in a joint statement with representatives of the firms Meta, TikTok, X and Snap that they will form an online safety action table, where they’ll discuss “tangible steps” towards protecting people from online harms.
Eby says the social media companies have “agreed to work collaboratively” with the province on preventing harm, while Meta will also commit to working with B.C’s emergency management officials to help amplify official information during natural disasters and other events.
“We have had assurance from Facebook on a couple of things. First, that they will work with us to deliver emergency information to British Columbia in this wildfire season that (people) can rely on, they can find easily, and that will link into official government channels to distribute information quickly and effectively,” Eby said at a Tuesday press conference.
“This is a major step and I’m very appreciative that we are in this place now.”
The announcement to put the bill on hold is a sharp turn for the government, after Eby announced in March that social media companies were among the “wrongdoers” that would pay for health-related costs linked to their platforms.
At the time, Eby compared social media harms to those caused by tobacco and opioids, saying the legislation was similar to previous laws that allowed the province to sue companies selling those products.
Last August, Eby criticized Meta over its continued blackout of Canadian news outlets as wildfires forced thousands from their homes. Eby said it was “unacceptable” for the tech giant to cut off access to news on its platforms at a time when people needed timely, potentially life-saving information.
“I think it’s fair to say that I was very skeptical, following the initial contact (with Meta),” Eby said Tuesday.
Eby said one of the key drivers for legislation targetting online harm was the death of Carson Cleland, the 12-year-old Prince George, B.C., boy who died by suicide last October after falling victim to online sextortion.
The premier says in announcing the pause that bringing social media companies to the table for discussion achieves the same purpose of protecting youth from online harm.
“Our commitment to every parent is that we will do everything we can to keep their families safe online and in our communities,” the premier said in his statement.
© 2024 The Canadian Press
|
|
VICTORIA — Premier David Eby has pushed the pause button on a contentious bill that would have allowed the province to recover health care and other costs attributed to the marketing of risky products in B.C.
Two dozen business and industry groups had called for the New Democrats to put the bill on hold, claiming it was so broadly drafted that it could be used to go after producers, distributors and retailers of every kind.
“It is safe to say that we got the attention of these major multinational companies,” the premier told reporters on Tuesday, citing the deal with Meta, Snapchat, TikTok and X, the major players in the field.
“They understand our concern and the urgency with which we’re approaching this issue. They also understand the bill is still there.”
The New Democrats maintain that the legislation was never intended to capture the many B.C. companies and associations that complained about it.
Rather it was targeted at Facebook owner Meta and other social media companies and the online harm done to young people. A prime example was the suicide of a Prince George youth who was trapped by an online predator.
Still, there was nothing in the wording of Bill 12, the Public Health Accountability and Cost Recovery Act, to indicate its application would be confined to social media companies or their impact on young people.
Some critics wondered if the bill’s broad-based concept of harms and risks could be used to prosecute the liquor board or the dispensers of safer-supply drugs, products with proven harms greater than any sugary drink.
Perhaps thinking along those lines, the government specifically exempted itself from prosecution under the Act.
This week’s announcement came as a surprise. As recently as Monday, Attorney General Niki Sharma told reporters the government had no intention of putting the bill on hold.
Tuesday, she justified her evasion by saying the talks with the social media companies were intense and confidential.
She said the pause was conditional on Meta and the other companies delivering a quick response to government concerns.
“British Columbians expect us to take action on online safety,” she told reporters. “What I’ll be looking for at this table is quick and immediate action to get to that better, safety online.”
A prime goal is addressing online harassment and “the online mental health and anxiety that’s rising in young people,” she said
“I want to sit down with these companies look at them face to face and see what they can do immediately to improve the outcomes for British Columbians.”
Meta has already committed to rectifying Eby’s concern that it should relay urgent news about wildfires, flood and other disasters in B.C. Last year, those were blocked, collateral damage in the company’s hardball dispute with the federal government over linking to news stories from Canadian media companies.
Eby says he was very skeptical about the initial contact from the companies. Now he sees Meta’s willingness to deliver emergency information as a “major step” and he’s prepared to give talks the benefit of the doubt.
Not long ago he was scoring political points off the social media companies in the harshest terms.
“The billionaires who run them resist accountability, resist any suggestion that they have responsibility for the harms that they are causing,” said the premier on March 14, the day Bill 12 was introduced.
Given those characterizations, perhaps the big, faceless billionaires will simply direct their negotiating team to play for time until the legislation adjourns as scheduled on May 16.
“The legislation is not being pulled and we’re not backtracking,” said Sharma. “We can always come back and bring legislation back.”
The government could schedule a quick makeup session of the legislature in late May or June or even in early September, before the house is dissolved for the four-week campaign leading up to the scheduled election day, Oct. 19.
More likely, if the New Democrats feel doublecrossed, they could go back to war with the faceless billionaires with a view to re-enacting Bill 12 after a hoped-for election victory.
Even if the New Democrats get some satisfaction from the social media companies in the short term, they have also framed Bill 12 as a way to force the marketers of risky products to help cover the cost of health care and other services.
B.C.’s attorney general says the province can bring the online harms legislation back but it will first seek remedies through negotiations with social media companies.Michael M. Santiago/Getty Images
The British Columbia government has agreed to shelve proposed legislation that would have allowed it to sue social-media companies for online harms after Meta, TikTok and others agreed to work with the province to put voluntary protections in place.
The social-media companies have not agreed to anything other than talks, but Attorney-General Niki Sharma credited the proposed legislation with bringing the key players to the province’s door.
“Our bill was able to get the attention of some pretty big companies out there and get them to the table with us, and I’m pleased with that,” she told reporters Tuesday.
The government can bring the bill back, she said, but it will first seek remedies through negotiations. “We could be locked in litigation for years, but at this stage it’s my obligation to see if we can come to some kind of improvements,” Ms. Sharma said.
Premier David Eby said the agreement was hammered out after Meta reached out to the province. A spokesperson for the company could not immediately be reached for comment.
Danielle Morgan, a spokesperson for TikTok, said her company is committed to developing new safeguards. “We look forward to joining Premier Eby and working with industry counterparts … to discuss best practices towards our shared goal of keeping young people safe online.”
The province introduced Bill 12, the Public Health Accountability and Cost Recovery Act, in March with the promise that it would allow government to recover costs associated with the promotion, marketing and distribution of products that are harmful to adults and children in the province.
But while the bill received the support of researchers who study the impact of some platforms on mental well-being, particularly in teenagers, the broad scope of the legislation alarmed business leaders who warned it could be used to target companies well beyond social-media platforms.
“The net spread so widely, it could capture just about anything you could imagine,” said Bridgitte Anderson, president and chief executive officer of the Greater Vancouver Board of Trade. She said the provincial government heard the concerns of many different sectors when it withdrew the bill from this spring’s legislative agenda. “We’re delighted the government is going to hit pause on this.”
The B.C. bill was tabled just weeks after Ottawa introduced Bill C-63 to create a new Online Harms Act, which is meant to hold tech platforms accountable for the content they host.
Kaitlynn Mendes, a professor of sociology at Ontario’s Western University, is an expert on the impact of online harms on youth, including sexual exploitation, self-harm, anxiety and anti-social behaviour.
She said the B.C. government is being optimistic in thinking it can bring social-media giants into line without a legal cudgel.
“I think that is wishful thinking. Industries don’t want to be governed. They’d rather have codes of conduct but that relies on them being good faith actors – ultimately, they are going to act in their best interests. I’d be skeptical that it’s going to change anything,” she said in an interview.
“I really hope the Canadian government doesn’t try to rely on deals. We need to have structures in place to hold these companies accountable.”
Mr. Eby issued a joint statement on Tuesday with representatives from Meta, TikTok, Snap and X, saying they have reached an agreement to work to help young people stay safe online through the new BC Online Safety Action Table.
“Digital platforms are powerful tools, which can connect family members and loved ones and are places where we find like-minded people. Places where community is built and sustained. But the internet is also a place where criminals and scammers are constantly seeking new ways to find and extort potential victims,” the joint statement said.
Mr. Eby championed the pursuit of tackling social-media harms after meeting with the grieving parents of Carson Cleland, a 12-year-old who killed himself last October after being sexually victimized online.
“Carson was deceived by an online predator, tormented and sexually extorted. He took his own life before his parents were aware of what was happening,” the statement continued. “Premier Eby made a promise to Carson’s parents that his government would find ways to make sure Carson left behind a legacy that will help protect other young people.”
The province will place Bill 12 on hold while the parties meet to discuss how to protect youth from online harms before they happen.
Ms. Sharma said there are three areas B.C. wants addressed: sexual exploitation of youth online; rising mental-health issues and anxiety among young people; and online harassment and bullying.
B.C.’s bill was modelled on its efforts to seek damages from major tobacco companies over tobacco-related health costs. The province was the first Canadian jurisdiction to launch such a lawsuit, in 1998, but that case is not yet resolved – underscoring the lengthy process involved in reaching a resolution.
Remnants of bird flu virus found in pasteurized milk, FDA says
Mayor's youth advisory council seeks submissions for art gala – SooToday
Bird flu virus found in grocery milk as officials say supply still safe
Taxes should not wag the tail of the investment dog, but that’s what Trudeau wants
Peel police chief met Sri Lankan officer a court says ‘participated’ in torture – Global News
iN PHOTOS: Nature lovers celebrate flora, fauna for Earth Day in Kamloops, Okanagan | iNFOnews | Thompson-Okanagan's News Source – iNFOnews
An exhibition with a cause: Montreal's 'Art by the Water' celebrates 15 years – CityNews Montreal
Vaughn Palmer: B.C. premier gives social media giants another chance
