I just don't get that viewpoint at all. Removing all news content was one of the two possible outcomes of that law. And the drafters of that law very intentiona

I just don't get that viewpoint at all. Removing all news content was one of the two possible outcomes of that law. And the drafters of that law very intentionally made the definition of news content as vague and broad as possible, to maximize the damage and thus minimize the odds of Facebook actually doing it. If you're outraged that "Facebook did this in the middle of a pandemic", why not be at least as outraged at the government for trying to pass such a law "in the middle of a pandemic"? Australia: We're going to draft a law that requires Facebook to do X or Y. Facebook: If those are the options. we're going to do Y. Australia: You're bluffing, you'd never dare to do Y. We're going to pass that law soon, and we're sure you'll do X instead. Facebook: Ok, we'll start doing Y right now. Australia: Outrageous! How dare you try to strongarm a democracy by doing Y.