I guess these sites aren't news organizations that would be covered by the proposed media law. Facebook is probably just trying to emphasise its point. Likewise, in restricting the availability of non-Australian news sites to users in Australia.

They're not news organisations covered by the code, but what they publish is news content, according to the code:

core news content means content that reports, investigates or explains:

a) issues or events that are relevant in engaging Australians in public debate and in informing democratic decision-making; or

b) current issues or events of public significance for Australians at a local, regional or national level

This just proves how misguidedly sweeping the legislation is.

52A: https://parlinfo.aph.gov.au/parlInfo/download/legislation/bi...

Worth noting that at least major ones like BOM, Queensland Health, Queensland Police and Betoota Advocate were blocked but that has been reverted now.

Those pages were probably in the news category.

>> They've not only blocked news pages but gov pages as well.

Couldn't this be a viewed as a criminal act by the Australian government? Could they arrest FB employees in Australia for FB HQ blocking their pages, especially with the vital COVID-19 information?

They didn't block their pages, they decided not to provide free hosting for them.

Those services are perfectly free to have their own websites that are not paid for or promoted by Facebook.

Twitter blocked the old US president too. There's no legal repercussion against a private firm.

>as a criminal act

What criminal act do you think applies here?