Willie R. Tubbs, FISM News
[elfsight_social_share_buttons id=”1″]
A bipartisan bill that would have allowed local newspapers to bypass antitrust laws in order to negotiate with big tech companies died almost as quickly as it was taken up in the Senate.
The Journalism Competition and Preservation Act (JCPA) – created by Senators Amy Klobuchar (D-Minn.) and John Kennedy (R-La.) – would create a window during which a collection of local newspapers and media outlets could negotiate with the likes of Google and Meta to receive compensation for the content these platforms acquire from those local entities.
It was, however, withdrawn about two hours into its markup process on Thursday after Sen. Ted Cruz (R-Texas) successfully rallied the Subcommittee on Competition Policy, Antitrust, and Consumer Rights to add an amendment to the bill that would have prevented social media and search engine giants from moderating content it received from the outlets with which it negotiated.
“What is preeminent to me is whether this bill is going to increase or decrease censorship,” Cruz said. “If you’re negotiating, you ought to be negotiating on the ostensible harm this bill is directed at, which is the inability to get revenues from your content. You should not be negotiating on content moderation and how you are going to censor substantive content.”
The amendment passed 11-10 in the subcommittee thanks to Kennedy agreeing with Cruz’s concerns and Sen. Jon Ossoff (D-Ga.) not being present.
Klobuchar – who opposed the amendment based on her belief it would give tech companies an “obvious opportunity for gamesmanship” – indicated that the withdrawal was temporary and meant only to allow for a bipartisan way forward to be found.
“We have to allow these news organizations to get better rates for content, and that means allowing them to band together…and negotiate,” Klobuchar said during an interview shared to her Senate website. “A little newspaper in Worthington, Minnesota…can’t exactly take on what those content rates are. Yet, we all want our towns to have some coverage of their city councils and high school football games.”
Cruz said the bill could have proceeded with his amendment in place and still achieved its purpose.
“What happened today was a huge victory for the First Amendment and free speech,” Cruz said in a statement. “Sadly, it is also a case study in how much the Democrats love censorship. They would rather pull their bill entirely than advance it with my proposed protections for Americans from unfair online censorship.”
The underlying concept behind the bill – fostering an environment in which local media can survive – is noncontroversial. The News Media Alliance, the century-old non-profit organization, provides a list of JCPA endorsements from journalists employed by Newsmax, the Washington Examiner, the Wall Street Journal, and numerous local media outlets.
Almost all of the support from right-leaning publications is predicated on the JCPA being a means of reigning in the power accumulated by big tech companies over the past decade.
“If you trust people living in your community more than out-of-touch, woke engineers living in Silicon Valley, then you should support the Journalism Competition and Preservation Act, which will be voted on by the Senate Judiciary Committee next month,” a Washington Examiner editorial from late August reads.
Klobuchar’s plan has met with resistance from entities who view the current bill as insufficient to solve, if not counterproductive to, the problem at hand.
Last week, a collection of more than 20 public interest, consumer advocacy, and civil society groups wrote a letter to Klobuchar and others urging that the bill be tabled.
“We are well aware that local news is in crisis,” the letter reads. “Many of [us] have passionately advocated for public policy solutions to ensure citizens have the quality information they need to engage in civic life and the political process. However, the JCPA will compound some of the biggest issues in our information landscape and do little to enable the most promising new models to improve it.”
Among the primary concerns for the letter’s signatories is that allowing news organizations to collectivize would drown out emerging media outlets.
“The JCPA will cement and stimulate consolidation in the industry and create new barriers to entry for new and innovative models of truly independent, local journalism,” the letter reads. “There are other policy solutions to the crisis in local journalism, and we strongly urge you to reconsider the Journalism Competition and Preservation Act.”
The American Action Forum, a nonprofit think tank, also opposed the JCPA on the grounds that it would create what would amount to a two-tier system: publishers included in the negotiating group and those not included.
“While concern about the loss of local and independent media organizations is understandable, exempting a single industry from conduct that is per se illegal under current law is not a viable solution,” Joshua Levine, an AAF policy analyst, writes. “By allowing eligible publishers and broadcasters to form a cartel, the legislation could cause rather than prevent harm to consumers and journalists alike.”
While her hesitance to allow an anti-censorship amendment into a bill aimed at preserving a free and independent press is odd, it would be unfair to characterize Klobuchar as a friend of big tech.
Klobuchar is among the more moderate Democrats when it comes to social media and tech issues. As previously reported on FISM, she has been harsh in her dealing with tech giants on matters of the mental harms social media can cause for youth as well as tech companies’ business practices.
Correction: The eighteenth paragraph was corrected to reflect that the American Action Forum is a non-profit think tank, not an advocacy group as the article originally stated.