Meta is facing scrutiny in the UK over proposed changes that publishers fear could allow the technology giant to scrape their online journalism for use in its artificial intelligence products without payment.
The company, which owns Facebook, Instagram and WhatsApp, has unilaterally sought to alter its terms for business accounts across its services, including Messenger. The changes have prompted the News Media Association and other publishers to raise concerns about the potential impact on journalism and press freedom.
Meta says the issue is largely the result of a misunderstanding. It has postponed the date on which the changes are due to take effect until November 20 and said publishers would still be able to block its web crawlers.
It also maintains that the new rights it is seeking would not alter the way it uses those crawlers, while asking for more time to explain its position.
However, Theo Bamber, chief executive of the News Media Association, which represents more than 900 news media titles across the UK, described the proposal in stark terms.
“Meta’s bid to force publishers to allow unrestricted scraping of their websites to power its AI products is an outrageous assault on journalism,” he said.
The Competition and Markets Authority said it “shares at face value the concerns” expressed by publishers and is examining Facebook’s proposed change to its terms.
Publishers fear loss of control over journalism
The concern is that Meta could gain access to substantial volumes of newspaper content published online, potentially including material produced over many years. Publishers fear that such content could be used to train AI systems, weakening the value of their own work and reducing their revenues.
Local news organisations are particularly exposed to changes in how Facebook distributes articles. As print circulation has fallen, some local outlets have come to rely heavily on social media referrals, with as many as a third of their audiences in the UK originating on Facebook.
Publishers could theoretically protect their material by leaving Facebook and Instagram, but doing so would risk losing revenue and audience reach. At least one local title in the United States, the McKinley Park News, has taken that step.
Meta’s scale means that its influence extends far beyond that of even the largest newspaper groups. Facebook has more than three billion monthly active users, while Instagram and WhatsApp have similarly extensive global reach.
The company’s size and market position have already brought it under scrutiny. A judge in New Mexico recently ordered Meta to pay 25 billion dollars after a jury found it liable for misleading users about privacy on Facebook. Meta is appealing against the fine.
In August, the company agreed to pay up to 18 billion dollars over ten years in relation to allegations that it had deliberately designed features harmful to children, including the “infinite scroll” used on its apps.
Meta has also faced criticism over its tax arrangements. In the UK, it reported a pre-tax profit of £362.4 million on revenues of £3.1 billion in 2024, and paid about £41 million in tax, equivalent to 12 per cent.
Regulators in Britain and the European Union are seen as having potential powers to challenge the company’s conduct. The CMA could use provisions in the Digital Markets, Competition and Consumers Act 2024, while the European Commission has previously imposed fines on Meta totalling about £850 million.
The dispute over web scraping comes as publishers attempt to protect both the value of their journalism and the independence of the Press from technology companies whose platforms have become major routes to online news.
