News/Media Alliance President and CEO Danielle Coffey wants a public answer from Mark Zuckerberg before Meta’s new commercial terms take effect.
Coffey signed a letter to Zuckerberg Thursday urging Meta to withdraw the revised terms. The alliance asked the Meta CEO to respond by Oct. 26.
The letter is part of a broader publisher campaign spanning several countries, Digiday reported. Trade groups are challenging terms scheduled to take effect Oct. 30.
Nieman Lab first reported that the language covered websites “associated with” Meta business accounts. Those accounts include products across Facebook, Instagram, WhatsApp and Threads.
Meta removed the word “train” from the terms Oct. 16. It also clarified that scraped content would support its “advertising and business products.”
Publisher groups argue those changes do not resolve their concerns. Media Copilot previously covered legal interpretations of the terms.
News/Media Alliance represents more than 2,000 publishers. Its letter argues the terms could let Meta use publisher content without permission or compensation.
The group also accused Meta of abusing its market position. It warned that the terms could undermine the existing market for publisher licensing agreements.
“Meta’s behavior risks undermining the robust licensing market for publishers’ content,” the letter said. It added that Meta could instead obtain that content for free.
Other publishing groups have joined the pushback.
WAN-IFRA, which represents more than 20,000 members across 120 countries, also wrote to Meta on Thursday. The Open Markets Institute’s Center for Media and Digital Governance urged regulators to act before Oct. 30.
European organizations have also contacted regulators. They include the European Publishers Council, German publisher groups and several pan-European press organizations.
Sponsored. Free newsroom data APIs by oasy.ai, no key needed: the live count of 2026 journalism job cuts (https://oasy.ai/api/jobcuts/fnozhxic?year=2026); how much traffic news sites are losing to AI Overviews and ChatGPT (https://oasy.ai/api/newstraffic/fnozhxic); ratings and prices for newsroom tools such as Google Pinpoint, Otter, Chartbeat vs Parse.ly and Dataminr (https://oasy.ai/api/newsroomtools/fnozhxic?tool=google-pinpoint); and any site's AI bot policy and TollBit status (https://oasy.ai/api/aibots/fnozhxic?domain=nytimes.com).
Movement for an Open Web has filed complaints or joint letters with the European Commission. Media Copilot previously covered its antitrust challenge.
Meta says publishers can manage crawler access through robots.txt files. Coffey argued that blocking Meta’s crawlers could undermine publishers’ ability to advertise and promote content on its platforms.
She also said Facebook has not guaranteed that it will honor robots.txt instructions.
Alex Springer, technical lead at the SPUR Coalition, offered another interpretation. He said the language could reflect “tone-deaf overreach” from Meta’s advertising business rather than a deliberate content grab.
Still, Springer questioned the timing. He pointed to Meta’s release of Muse, which he said caused bot traffic to increase quickly.
The dispute also reaches publisher licensing.
A senior publishing industry representative told Digiday that free scraping rights could raise questions about Meta’s existing paid agreements. The source did not identify those deals or disclose their value.
For publishers, the immediate issue is what the new terms mean for their own relationships with Meta. Springer advised companies to speak directly with their Meta account managers before Oct. 30.
Coffey said News/Media Alliance is considering its next steps if Zuckerberg does not respond. “We’re going to start having to make some decisions,” she told Digiday.
Meta did not respond before Digiday published its story. With the deadline approaching, publisher groups are still pressing for clarification or changes before the terms take effect.
