Facebook ‘prepared for months’ for news ban

New disclosures contradict the tech giant’s claims it inadvertently banned charities, health services and even the government in Australia last year.

Facebook chairman and chief executive Mark Zuckerberg arrives to testify before the House Financial Services Committee in Washington, DC. Picture: Mandel Ngan / AFP

Facebook was preparing internally for Australia’s landmark news bargaining code for at least five months, despite later blaming a “technical error” when it blocked charities, government services and critical health organisations amid bushfires and the pandemic.

Changes made by Facebook to its user terms of service announced publicly on September 2, 2020 show that the tech giant was working behind the scenes to limit any legal fallout from Australia’s impending news media bargaining code, which became law in February 2021, forcing tech companies including Facebook to pay millions of dollars to news publishers.

The addition, which was effective from October 1, 2020 and remains in Facebook’s terms of service, reads: “We also can remove or restrict access to your content, services or information if we determine that doing so is reasonably necessary to avoid or mitigate adverse legal or regulatory impacts to Facebook.”

In February 2021, a week before the parliament vote on the media bargaining laws, Facebook said it would remove news from its platform. However, the pages that were removed included hospitals, charities, emergency services and even the government. Whistleblowers earlier this month came forward alleging the take-down was a deliberate tactic to wreak havoc and maximise leverage in its fight against the federal government, while Facebook claims its failings were “inadvertent.”

Andrew Bakaj, the Washington DC lawyer representing several Facebook whistleblowers, said that the terms of service changes prove Facebook’s decision to initiate the take-down was prepared months prior to February 2021.

“I think this, along with the internal communications among senior leadership congratulating one another, underscores that the scope of the take-down wasn’t inadvertent,” Mr Bakaj said in an interview.

“I think the company’s credibility has long been in jeopardy. But given the revelations that it appears they planned this so many months prior, Meta’s assertion that it didn’t know that the ban would also hit charities and health organisations doesn’t hold water. In fact, internal communications shows that it went exactly as planned. They wanted to maximise their leverage, and they did just that.

“This behaviour shows that they will do anything to get their way – even if it means extorting a nation state.”

The lawyer, who came to prominence in 2019 when he represented the whistleblower who filed a complaint that led to the Trump-Ukraine scandal, said the onus is now on the Australian government to investigate the tech giant.

Lawyer Andrew Bakaj. Source: Supplied.

“All that we ask and hope for is that the government of Australia proceed with an investigation and take any and all appropriate action based on the investigative findings,” he said.

“This is a serious matter because their actions are a threat to democratic institutions globally.”

A spokesman for Facebook’s parent company Meta declined to comment.

It follows revelations from The Australian that Facebook executives deliberately shielded documents by encouraging staff to falsely label them “lawyer-client privileged” despite the files not involving legal issues or being sent to lawyers.

Documents provided to the US congress also allege the social media company took the unprecedented step of requiring all employees in a team created to deal with the Australian Competition & Consumer Commission to sign strict nondisclosure agreements.

The whistleblowers are calling for criminal and civil proceedings against Facebook.

“Our clients reasonably believe the foregoing is sufficient to open criminal and civil investigations into Meta,” the filings with Congress read.