They had a win/win situation before. The news sites got free traffic and social media got free content. I don’t understand why they made this law but the outcome was predictable.
That's a very short sighted take on a complex issue. Working in the media publishing sector, I can assure you this never was "win/win" and your definition of "free" doesn't quite work here. As usual, that "free" content you think you're enjoying from large social media outlets always comes at a cost: to our local reporters and editors, to our communities and how they consume news which is TAILORED by non-local corps looking to maximize profit, and to the very shaping of the moral fabric of where you live. Folks in your town/city will just behave differently if their inbox feed shows sensationalized stories chosen by an algorithm to maximize engagement, vs a curated balance of material.
Could there be bias in both models? You bet! But the scales tip dramatically when your tiny, underfunded local outlet has to go toe-to-toe with the likes of Facebook and Google. Hardly a "win/win".