A bill that would require large tech companies to compensate newsrooms for the local journalism on platforms like Google and Facebook is advancing to the floor of the Oregon state Senate.
Democrats on the Senate Committee on Rules on Monday advanced Senate Bill 686 to the floor over Republican opposition.
The bill would have tech companies pay at least $122 million annually to access the media produced by journalists across Oregon. It would also allow companies to determine a different payment through arbitration and fund a consortium at the University of Oregon that supports journalism statewide through grants.
A bill that would require large tech companies to compensate newsrooms for the local journalism on platforms like Google and Facebook is advancing to the floor of the Oregon state Senate.
Kristyna Wentz-Graff / OPB
Advertisement
Money under the bill would be distributed to newsrooms based on how many journalists they employ in the state.
The bill was introduced by Sen. Khanh Pham, D-Portland. It’s sponsored by 14 Democrats — including caucus leaders like House Majority Leader Ben Bowman — and one Republican, Sen. Dick Anderson, R-Lincoln City.
As Oregon newsrooms struggle and local reporting jobs plummet, supporters say the bill would provide a much-needed boost that could encourage civic engagement and accountability. Backers include many journalism leaders throughout Oregon and organizations advocating for sustainable local news. (Oregon Public Broadcasting is among the supporters.)
Critics — big tech lobbyists among them — contend that the bill would result in the companies pulling Oregon journalism from their platforms, harming online local news engagement and deepening the problems facing newsrooms.
The bill faced additional challenges during a work session with lawmakers Monday. Christopher Allnatt, an attorney from the Office of Legislative Counsel, testified that the bill could violate constitutional law barring the government from taking private property for public use.
Advertisement
Allnat said a legal challenge to SB 686 would “likely” find it violates “certain provisions to the federal and state constitutions.”
Senate Minority Leader Daniel Bonham, R-The Dalles, opposed the bill, saying he was concerned it would result in legal challenges that could cost taxpayers money.
“It absolutely violates the Constitution, in my opinion,” Bonham said. “I am no constitutional scholar, but I’ve read the document and I’ve read our oath of office. And I don’t see how we could put this forward with the explanation that we’ll let the courts decide with the evidence that we have from our own paid attorneys.”
If passed, the bill would continue Oregon’s tradition of passing relatively novel legislation. Proposals like this bill have yet to face substantial court challenges, so it’s unclear whether it would stand up to scrutiny.
Democrats on the committee acknowledged that there might be a legal fight, but they said the battle is worth it to support struggling newsrooms, and to check what they see as harmful business practices of large tech companies.
Advertisement
Sen. Jeff Golden, D-Ashland, argued that the bill addresses how big tech companies use their influence to extract “much more wealth than the creators of the product that they’re selling.”
“There’s been awareness for this problem for a long time,” Golden said. “We’ve watched a lot of local journalism disappear without knowing what to do about it. Some very well-informed people from across the nation came together to start on a path that this bill represents.”
Bonham isn’t pleased with the prospect of Oregon once again leading the way into such uncharted legal waters.
“One of the fundamental things that we’ve done in the United States is to say that we’re not going to tax the internet,” Bonham said. “And yet here we are in the state of Oregon, the tip of the spear. We’re going to wage this war. This is going to cost significant amounts of money.”
A spokesperson for Meta, which owns Facebook and Instagram, issued a statement in response to Monday’s vote.
Advertisement
FILE – This photo shows the mobile phone app logos for Facebook, left, and Instagram, both owned by Meta.
Richard Drew / AP
“If faced with legislation that requires us to pay for news content that publishers voluntarily post and is not the reason most people come to Facebook and Instagram, we will be forced to make the same business decision in Oregon as we did in Canada and end news availability on these services,” the statement said.
Dan Sachs, Meta’s senior national director for state and local policy, sent a letter to lawmakers in April, saying the bill is “based on a false premise that social media companies are unjustly benefiting from news content on their platforms.” He said outlets voluntarily post their content to social media to bolster readership, adding the company does “not proactively pull news links from the internet and place them in users’ Facebook or Instagram feeds.”
Similar laws have passed in California and Canada. The Canadian bill prompted Meta to block news on their platforms, causing problems for some local publications.
Advertisement
Sen. James Manning, D-Eugene, said during Monday’s work session he was recently visited by “Meta and a few others, and they came in threatening. I don’t like to be threatened.”
He said the visitors warned they’d cut Oregonians off from news content if the bill passed, similar to actions taken in Canada.
“That’s not how a successful corporation does business,” Manning said. “A successful corporation tries to gather and expand their business. They try to get more people onto their platforms. And you do that by doing the right thing by the people that you are profiting off of.”
A Canadian news nonprofit announced last week that 108 news businesses received more than $22 million in the first payment made under Canada’s new policy.
Responding to news of the payments in Canada, U.S. Sen. Amy Klobuchar, D-Minnesota, said in a post on X: “This support is crucial as outlets struggle to stay afloat. We have a bipartisan bill in the U.S. to do the same thing – we must pass it and support local news.”
Advertisement
Correction: An earlier version of this story misstated state Sen. James Manning’s first name.
The University of Oregon’s Board of Trustees voted Tuesday to approve a $1.55 billion operating budget for the next fiscal year.
But they asked university leadership to return with an amended proposal by Dec. 15, when more details about future budget cuts will be known.
FILE — The Board of Trustees recently approved next year’s budget for the University of Oregon. The vote comes several weeks after the school’s president announced that he wants the university to reduce its annual budget as revenues and out-of-state enrollment decline.
Brian Bull / KLCC
Advertisement
The vote comes several weeks after University of Oregon President Karl Scholz announced that he wants the school to reduce its annual budget by around $65 million.
At a trustees meeting Monday, Scholz said the estimated budget shortfall for next year is just around $23 million. But he said out-of-state enrollment is below historical norms for the second year in a row, and it’s unlikely to bounce back.
“One year can be an aberration. Two years is a pattern,” said Scholz. “And I believe we have to treat it as a new reality.”
Scholz said in May that discussions about the budget would happen over a six-month period. He said no final decisions about cuts would be made over this summer.
On Monday, UO Senate President Dyana Mason told trustees that the Senate had approved a new process to allow for community feedback in the cost-cutting process.
Advertisement
Mason said the provost will work with the deans on budget proposals, finding “clear rationale” for why programs are considered for elimination.
The provost would then bring those proposals to the Senate Committee for Academic Modifications—which includes staff, faculty and students—for feedback.
Once the plans are nearly finalized, the Senate could then hold a period for public comment.
Mason told trustees that a six-month timeline is better than the three months that frustrated some staff last year, but she recommended taking however much time is necessary.
“The worst situation would be rushing forward to make decisions without appropriate evidence, data, feedback from the people that are most in the know about the impact on our students,” said Mason.
Advertisement
UO’s Board of Trustees Chair Steve Holwerda said that every week that university delays the decisions could cost them millions of dollars.
Nathan Wilk is a reporter with the KLCC newsroom.This story comes to you from the Northwest News Network, a collaboration between public media organizations in Oregon and Washington.
It is part of OPB’s broader effort to ensure that everyone in our region has access to quality journalism that informs, entertains and enriches their lives. To learn more, visit our journalism partnerships page.
Sign up today for OPB’s “First Look” – your daily guide to the most important news and culture stories from around the Northwest.
Oregon’s juvenile justice system has been reshaped in recent years by a sweeping reform law that changed how the state handles minors accused of serious crimes.
Senate Bill 1008, which took effect in 2020, ended automatic transfers of juveniles into adult court and eliminated life without parole sentences for juveniles. The law also created “second-look” hearings and established parole eligibility after 15 years for certain offenders who committed crimes before turning 18.
To help explain the law and its impact, KVAL’s Frannie Pedersen put together a timeline video tracing the history of Senate Bill 1008, from the passage of Measure 11 in 1994 to the reforms that later reshaped Oregon’s juvenile justice system.
Advertisement
BE THE FIRST TO COMMENT
The video breaks down how the law changed, why lawmakers pushed for reform, and how SB 1008 continues to influence Oregon’s justice system today. Viewers can watch the full video for a detailed timeline and explanation of the changes.
PORTLAND, Ore. — A New Jersey man was sentenced to federal prison last Friday for conspiring to distribute fentanyl, announced U.S. Attorney Scott E. Bradford for the District of Oregon.
Mark T. Eager, 34, was sentenced to 135 months in federal prison and five years of supervised release.
“This defendant showed a blatant disregard for human life by trafficking fentanyl across the United States,” said U.S. Attorney Bradford. “My office will continue to pursue those who profit from poisoning our communities, and we will use every available resource and partnership to combat fentanyl trafficking and keep Oregonians safe.”
“This investigation brought together law enforcement agencies from across the nation,” said Homeland Security Investigations (HSI) Seattle acting Special Agent in Charge April Miller. “Homeland Security Investigations special agents from Portland, Newark, and Houston contributed to the case, along with the Portland Police Bureau and HIDTA HIT officers, who were instrumental in identifying Eager. His 11-year sentence sends a clear message: no matter where you are in the country or the world, if you attempt to sell narcotics online to Americans, we will find you.”
Advertisement
“Fentanyl trafficking poses a grave threat to communities across the United States, and Homeland Security Investigations is committed to working with our partners to disrupt and dismantle the criminal networks responsible,” said HSI Houston Special Agent in Charge Lucia Cabral-DeArmas. “This case demonstrates the power of interagency collaboration under the Homeland Security Task Force initiative, leveraging resources from across the country to hold traffickers accountable and protect the American people. We will continue to pursue those who endanger lives through the distribution of dangerous synthetic opioids, and we remain steadfast in our mission to safeguard our communities from the violence and instability caused by transnational criminal organizations.”
“By following this offender’s digital trail, Homeland Security Investigations and our law enforcement partners nationwide executed federal search warrants, dismantled an active dark web fentanyl packaging operation and recovered deadly amounts of fentanyl, thousands of dollars in cryptocurrency, and a trove of electronic devices and packaging materials,” said HSI Newark Acting Special Agent in Charge Spiros Karabinas. “This case is a powerful example of how coordinated, data-driven investigations can disrupt dangerous networks and help protect our communities from lethal synthetic opioids.”
According to court documents, from November 2023 through June 2024, Eager and his co-conspirator sold fentanyl on the Dark Net and Telegram. Eager operated as the vendor WRSEH10 and marketed the fentanyl as “China White Synthetic Heroin.”
In June 2024, HSI agents executed search warrants on two residences associated with Eager in Kearny, New Jersey, and seized over 360 grams of powdered fentanyl, counterfeit M30 pills, drug ledgers, cellular phones, two computers, and drug packaging consistent with three deliveries that were sent to Oregon.
On September 4, 2024, a federal grand jury in Portland returned a four-count indictment charging Eager with conspiracy to distribute and possess with intent to distribute fentanyl and distribution of fentanyl.
Advertisement
On February 4, 2026, Eager pleaded guilty to conspiracy to distribute and possess with intent to distribute fentanyl.
HSI Portland and HSI Houston investigated this case with assistance from HSI Newark, the Portland Police Bureau (PPB) and the High Intensity Drug Trafficking Area (HIDTA) Interdiction Task Force (HIT). Assistant U.S. Attorney Scott Kerin prosecuted the case. The U.S. Attorney’s Office in New Jersey assisted the U.S. Attorney’s in Oregon in obtaining the search warrants that were executed in Kearny.
