PORTLAND, OR – The Oregon Senate on June 25, 2025, delivered a significant setback to proponents of measures aimed at compelling major technology companies to financially compensate local news organizations for the use of their content. In a narrow vote, the Senate defeated the Oregon Journalism Protection Act, identified as S.B. 686, effectively ending its prospects in the current legislative session as adjournment approaches.
The proposed legislation, introduced by State Sen. Khanh Pham, a Democrat representing Portland, sought to establish a framework under which dominant online platforms would be required to enter into negotiations or arbitration with news publishers to determine fair compensation for the value derived from displaying or linking to news content produced by these organizations. Supporters argued the bill was a necessary intervention to address the economic challenges facing local journalism, asserting that technology platforms benefit immensely from news content without adequately compensating the creators.
The Bill’s Purpose and Proponents’ Case
The Oregon Journalism Protection Act (S.B. 686) was framed by its proponents, including many publishers and media advocates, as a lifeline for struggling local news outlets across the state. They contended that the shift of advertising revenue to online platforms, coupled with the platforms’ utilization of news content to drive engagement, had severely eroded the financial viability of traditional newsrooms. Publishers supporting the bill argued that forcing technology companies to pay for the use of their journalistic output was not only a matter of fairness but also essential for the very survival of local news operations.
According to these advocates, robust local journalism is critical for informed citizenry and maintaining strong community coverage. They posited that the financial boost from tech compensation would enable newsrooms to invest in reporting, retain journalists, and continue providing the essential local news that keeps communities connected and accountable. The bill was seen as a way to rebalance the relationship between content creators and the platforms that benefit from their work.
Concerns Raised by Opponents
Despite the impassioned arguments from publishers, S.B. 686 faced significant opposition, particularly from technology industry groups and some policy analysts. Critics voiced concerns that the potential consequences of the bill could be detrimental, possibly leading to unintended negative outcomes for both news publishers and the public.
A primary concern highlighted by opponents was the risk that major technology companies, such as Meta (the parent company of Facebook and Instagram), might retaliate against the legislation. Critics pointed to actions taken in other jurisdictions, specifically citing the situation in Canada, where Meta responded to similar legislation by blocking access to news content on its platforms within that country. There were fears that passage in Oregon could prompt a similar withdrawal of news links, previews, and articles from feeds and search results, potentially limiting Oregonians’ access to news through these widely used channels.
Furthermore, opponents argued that S.B. 686 might disproportionately benefit larger, out-of-state media corporations rather than primarily supporting the smaller, independent local news outlets it purportedly aimed to protect. Concerns were raised that national chains, such as Gannett, with their extensive resources and legal teams, would be better positioned to negotiate lucrative deals with tech platforms than small, family-owned newspapers or digital-first startups, potentially exacerbating existing inequalities within the media landscape rather than solving them.
The Senate Vote
The fate of the Oregon Journalism Protection Act was sealed on the Senate floor with a narrow vote of 15-14 against the measure. The close margin reflected the divided perspectives on the bill’s merits, potential impacts, and whether state-level regulation was the appropriate mechanism to address complex issues involving global technology platforms and the future of journalism.
The defeat comes as the Oregon legislative session draws to a close, leaving little opportunity for the bill or a similar measure to be reconsidered before adjournment. The outcome underscores the challenging path forward for state-level initiatives seeking to address the financial challenges of local news through direct regulation of technology companies.
Looking Ahead
The rejection of S.B. 686 leaves the question of how to financially support local journalism in Oregon unanswered by this specific legislative approach. While proponents may seek alternative strategies in future sessions or at the federal level, the immediate result means news organizations will not receive mandated compensation from tech platforms under this proposal.
The debate surrounding S.B. 686 mirrors similar discussions happening in states across the U.S. and internationally, highlighting the ongoing struggle for news publishers to adapt to the digital age and find sustainable business models while grappling with the dominance of online platforms. The Oregon Senate’s decision on June 25, 2025, adds another chapter to this complex and evolving story.
