Squeezing Money From Big Tech No Solution For Local News Media

Michael Hedges December 7, 2022 - Follow on Twitter

For several years publishers in search of more money have targeted Big Tech, internet services providers such as search engine Google and social network Facebook. The logic has been unambiguous; Big Tech has Big Money and publishers, so they say, deserve some because it’s there or, maybe, for defending democracy. Publishers’ first stop in this quest was through politicians, always amenable to favorable news coverage. With resistance growing among the public - remember them? - to paying for subscriptions, not to forget being irritated by unwanted pillow adverts, appeals in their direction was hardly considered. Lawmakers were a better vehicle for extracting money. Just because none of this worked out quite as well as expected, publishers have not given up.

The United States Senate - the upper house - put an end, however temporary, to the Journalism Competition and Preservation Act (JCPA) this week. The proposed law was introduced to “address dominant online platforms’ power over news organizations,” said a statement from Senator Amy Klobuchar (D-Minnesota) (September 22), one of the bill’s sponsors. Then it was rolled into the omnibus National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA) - always certain to pass - for the US Congress to consider.

Then JCPA just disappeared, no longer appearing in the NDAA text. On Monday, reported the Business Insider (December 7), Facebook owner Meta policy communications director Andy Stone clarified the company’s position on JCPA as potential end to news content on the platform in the US. “The Journalism Competition and Preservation Act fails to recognize the key fact: publishers and broadcasters put their content on our platform themselves because it benefits their bottom line — not the other way round. No company should be forced to pay for content other users don't want to see and that's not a meaningful source of revenue."

That argument is consistent with Big Tech’s view of similar legislation. Some may recall how Google effectively deplatformed Spain in 2014 after a similar law was passed there. The Spain Google platform was dark until 2021 when the country amended the law. Then there was the day in 2014 when Axel Springer chief executive Mathias Döpfner went hat in hand to beg forgiveness from Google after a German law sought to force “negotiations” over “link tax” payments. When Australia curved in the same direction it was quickly discovered that the chief beneficiaries were the biggest publishers, including News Corp, rather than small, struggling local outlets.

JCPA opponents argued provisions in the bill would shield publishers from anti-trust laws to allow lawsuits claiming damages from tech platforms for reducing reach and moderating offensive content, reported CNN (December 7). The American Civil Liberties Union, the Electronic Frontier Foundation and others said the law “could end up disproportionately favoring large media companies over the small, local and independent outlets that have been hit the hardest by falling digital ad revenues.” The JCPA is modeled on the aforementioned Australian law.

“Objective journalism is crucial to a democracy, but this legislation will promote media cartels and compel digital sites to subsidize dangerous sources of misinformation online," said tech trade body Computer and Communications Industry Association president Matt Schruers, in a statement quoted by Axios (December 6). Esteemed Axios media reporter Sara Fischer notes Canadian lawmakers and New Zealand authorities have rule making in the plans to squeeze money from Big Tech for publishers.

See also...

• Hot Topics - Media Support

• Hot Topics - Google/Alphabet