Publishers are seeking greater control over how Meta accesses their websites, as European scrutiny intensifies over proposed business terms and concerns that collected journalism could support competing artificial intelligence services without permission or financial compensation.
Meta has put proposed changes to its business terms on hold following opposition from publishers and open internet advocates, who warned that the provisions could give the company sweeping access to content on their websites.
The dispute centres on whether businesses using Meta’s platforms would effectively have to permit automated collection of material published elsewhere online. Publishers fear such access could extend to journalism used to develop artificial intelligence services that compete with their own offerings.
Meta rejects that interpretation, saying the update concerns its advertising and business services. Its existing terms will remain applicable while the company consults industry organisations and considers their objections. No replacement implementation date has been announced.
The changes were initially scheduled for October 30, before implementation was moved to November 20 following engagement with the Competition and Markets Authority (CMA). Meta paused the rollout pending consultation, according to the regulator.
Under the proposed wording, automated systems, could access websites associated with business accounts to gather, index and analyse information. Media companies argue that the breadth of those permissions raises questions about consent, commercial rights and payment for content.
Meta spokesperson Andy Stone has said the purpose is to obtain accurate details about products sold on external websites for advertising and content recommendations. The company maintains that the revisions would not change its existing approach to web crawling or authorise news scraping.
European authorities examine proposed terms
The dispute has prompted European legal action. On October 28, a Norwegian court granted a temporary injunction against the disputed provision following a challenge backed by 180 media companies.
The Norwegian Media Businesses’ Association supported the proceedings. Its newspapers represent 97% of newspaper circulation in Norway. The court’s intervention temporarily prevents introduction of the contested provision while its legality is assessed.
In Britain, the CMA opened an investigation on October 30 into whether Meta’s commercial terms breach competition law. It will assess whether the company holds a dominant position in a relevant market and whether the conditions constitute an abuse of that position.
The authority said businesses may face unfair trading conditions if accepting the terms becomes necessary to continue using Meta’s services. It stressed that the investigation is at an early stage and no finding of wrongdoing has been made.
The European Commission has also discussed the proposals with Meta and welcomed the postponement, while emphasising the company’s obligations under European competition rules.
Publishers seek consent and compensation
Norwegian publishers want recognition of restrictions on automated content collection. They are seeking separate, voluntary agreements, including compensation, before journalism is used in AI products, alongside protection against reduced visibility on Meta’s platforms if they decline the revised conditions.
The Movement for an Open Web welcomed the pause but argued that regulatory intervention remains necessary to prevent powerful technology companies from imposing unfair terms.
For publishers, the unresolved issue is whether their use of social platforms could become tied to permission for broader exploitation of their content. Meta’s consultation will now take place against continuing scrutiny of the proposed terms and demands for clearer safeguards governing access to journalism.
