I listened patiently to the entire video and was not swayed by its arguments.

When users share links on social media, it is the users who are sharing the links — not the social media platforms themselves.

I continue to believe that government intervention to force social media companies to pay media companies for user-shared links is both wrong and counterproductive. In fact, past attempts to do so have backfired.

I agree that keeping journalism funded is important, but I don't believe two wrongs make a right.

It's also worth noting that social media platforms operate under the same principle that sharing a link does not create an obligation to pay the link owner — for example, Facebook does not pay Google when users share YouTube links.

However, I do support requiring Google and other search engines to pay for zero-click links.

This is fundamentally different because the search engine itself chooses to scrape and display content directly, rather than simply linking to it.

I'm disappointed that the video doesn't even attempt to distinguish between these very different cases.

I believe the status quo in Australia — where Google pays for zero-click links but Facebook does not pay for user-shared links — is the optimal approach and should be maintained.

media law

Zero-Click Links vs User-Shared Links: An Important Distinction