>It is that they have to pay new sources for copyrighted content that they display on Meta sites. Even linking to a news article without a title or blurb would

>It is that they have to pay new sources for copyrighted content that they display on Meta sites. Even linking to a news article without a title or blurb would have qualified. >Meta decided that they didn't want to pay for other people's work. If it makes them less money than it would cost, why would they?