That doesn't automatically make this particular law less dumb, though.
Or they can just cut off service to that marketplace and let the electorate take up the matter with their elected officials...
Unfortunately, the myth still abounds that the conservative side of politics are better economic managers (despite all evidence to the contrary), and the progressives are more concerned about appearances than they are about providing an alternative and representing the working class.
Since we vote for a party, and not a personality, we don't get to pick our prime minister, and since the MSM here is mostly Murdoch-controlled (and he can't keep his digits out of our politics, even though he hasn't lived here for decades), the reporting is myopic and mostly one-sided.
The politicians have become brazen with their corruption as well. There are some rays of hope with new media commentators taking them to task, but it's going to take a grass-roots backlash to unhinge the current party (though this is happening more and more).
Aussie here. I don't side with Google and I certainly don't like our government. But at least we elected this government. Google is using its position of dominance as a threat and will deplatform their search to us.
To me that sounds more strange than the government wanting a bit of profit sharing from Google to other media outlets.
There's a few threads about this law on HN already and there's no reason to repeat those arguments again and again. Regardless, my point isn't that the law seem poorly written ; it's that Australia is well within it's rights to regulate it's own internal market regardless of what people on the other side of the Globe think about it.