Google good, Facebook bad. That sums up mainstream media coverage of the Coalition government’s bizarre new media code. That’s because Google paid up, Facebook decided it was extortion and called Josh Frydenberg’s bluff, banning Australian news. The mainstream media has been corrupted.
As if Rupert Murdoch and the Coalition had not already flubbed Australia’s credibility around the world for their failure on climate change, now we look like we don’t know how the internet works.
It is either that, the Dumb Aussies narrative, or something more sinister. The Morrison government, with the feeble connivance of Labor, has demanded Google and Facebook pay News Corp, Nine and Coalition-friendly media organisations for “content”, for their stories that is.
Yet, in their childish fervor to bust into the market and prop up these government friendly publishers, their bizarre Digital Media Code has got it completely wrong. Google and Facebook don’t even publish their stories, merely links to their stories.
The reader then clicks on the link and it takes them to the publisher’s website. Google and Facebook are doing the legacy media a favour; it’s free advertising.
This Digital Media Code has nothing to do with policy and everything to do with politics. Morrison & co have just bought off the media in what may well be an election year.
With the UK trust fund-backed Guardian Australia the latest to sign with Google, only the ABC remains outside the tent, apparently too terrified of upsetting the government, and perhaps themselves too tempted by the spectre of Google’s money, to say anything. So far, barely a squeak.
If Australia is regarded with faint horror for its failure to act on climate science, this media “world first” will well and truly have us all smeared across the globe. It really is the flip-side of corporate capture on coal and gas.
In climate and energy, governments are captured by fossil fuel companies, captured to the point of siding with Donald Trump on emissions timetables. In this case, major media organisations and government have captured each other.
Zuckerberg v Frydenberg
Australia’s treasurer Josh Frydenberg was at Harvard in the same year the undergraduate Mark Zuckerberg created Facebook. That was 2005. So when Josh rang Mark last week to discuss his Digital Media Code, one might have expected some cordiality between the old-time Ivy Leaguers.
It was only a few hours later however, that the Facebook founder called Josh’s bluff and banned Australian news sites from his platform altogether, clumsily sweeping up emergency services and all manner of community Facebook pages in the ban.
Zuckerberg is betting his show of force will deter other governments from caving in to their media mates. Google on the other hand has merely bought off big media. Guardian Australia is the last one to strike a deal so now the entire Canberra Bubble has been locked in with payments prised out of Google by the Coalition government.
Google News Showcase all show
According to Google sources however, they regard their pay-offs as just that, protection money, money to get the mainstream media off their backs. When asked whether this small player, Michael West Media, would have a chance of getting money from Google News Showcase, we were told probably not.
Most of these deals with Big Media were struck, at least negotiated, before even the draft Bill had been made law. Google simply went out and picked off each organisation one by one. Four mid-sized operators to start: The Conversation, Crikey, New Daily and Saturday Paper.
Then the big fanboys. Kerry Stokes’ Seven Network, an effusive cheerleader for the Coalition. Then Nine, the only media company to host a Liberal Party fundraiser, then News Corp, Rupert Murdoch’s neo-conservative propaganda machine.
Murdoch and Nine were the prime movers. First, the ACCC was bamboozled into holding an inquiry which purported to be about fair competition. Then the Government was persuaded to think the issues were media diversity and quality of journalism, and not about advertising revenue.
Google had sniffed the wind, setting up its Google News Showcase to head off regulatory action, to lure influential publishers with payments for their content. In light of this organisation’s efforts to find a phone number, even a human being, to talk with, the Showcase it would appear is just that. So we have Google payments made with no reference the the Code – the government’s laws – and an elusive program called Showcase.
On a short term basis, Google’s PR campaign has worked. Facebook has been smashed by all the same media who just picked up millions in cash extorted from Google. Google’s press has been good. The usual hysterical voices have been slamming Facebook for its “dog act” to all Australians, etc.
Politics not policy
If the government were given to making good policy, rather than locking in big media mates for the next election, they would simply tax Facebook and Google properly, then deploy the funds to subsidise public interest journalism, perhaps along with tax incentives. They have failed to tax them properly. Although both digital platforms pay more income tax in Australia than Rupert Murdoch’s News Australia Holdings (zero for 6 years now), it is still negligible for their size and market power.
Their real (not claimed) profit margins in this country are so huge that it is far more effective for them to pay, say $100 million collectively to a few corrupted old media companies than 30% tax in the dollar (before their tax avoidance tricks).
Some data points (using Similarweb data to make it comparable, may differ from our own data).
- Junkee.com has done a deal with Google – their total Australian traffic (January) is 370,000 visits – 100,000 less than Michael West Media.
- News.com.au gets 8.2% of their traffic from social media
- smh.com.au gets 7.3%
- abc.net.au 7.5%
- MWM 39.7% (60% of that is FB, but I have no way of breaking down that figure from others)
- News Limited suggested they were losing $1billion in annual revenue to Facebook and Google
- Nine Media (Costello) thought it was at least $600 million.
In terms of public interest, the media code will only distort news for consumers. Facebook users, already barraged by fake news, will have less real news to balance their views. The Google payments will bring established old media players even closer and more dependent on government here. It keeps old inefficient businesses alive while penalising its smaller independent rivals.
And as this story in RenewEconomy contends, it will only drag out and exacerbate the toxic influence of Rupert Murdoch’s News Corporation in undermining critical action on climate change – not to mention all public policy.
Look forward to a more captured political class and a more subservient mainstream media.
Comments
25 responses to “Laughing Stock: Australia’s new media code rivals our climate policy for absurdity”
If it looks like a tax and walks like a tax and quacks like a tax, it is a tax. “Bargain” is a much better euphemism than “levy” or even “surcharge”, the old standbys.
Only this time the person proposing and supporting the “bargain” is also the beneficiary of the proceeds. How good is that?
Scomo could have used the leverage of NewsCorp’s tender concern for quality journalism to levy an advertising tax as recommended by Malcolm Turnbull and Kevin Rudd. They have been joined by a small number of others with no vested interest, unlike the journalist worker bees doing NewsCorp shareholders’ bidding. Having raised such a tax which is ostensibly paid by others, part of the revenue could be diverted to other uses in the way that fuel excise is used for purposes apart from road funding.
Google’s bargains have probably taken the risk of such a tax off the table. Media sources claim Google has taken revenue they consider to be theirs as of right. But much of that revenue has gone to specialist sites like CarSales, BoatSales, Seek, LinkedIn, eBay and GumTree providing superior service to print classifieds. Much of the rest of the revenue comes from searches for websites. Traditional media could never provide this service. An advertising tax could cover specialist sites including Realestate and Domain. These sites are exceptionally profitable and valuable but have been quarantined in this debate.
They will not admit it, but clearing forests to deliver information is costly and unnecessary in 2021, but print media interests cling on for the perceived power they exert on political fortunes. We are seeing that in action as news is downgraded in favour of opinion. We have seen in the motor vehicle industry that taxes can only prop up dying industries for so so long.
It is shameful that a body charged with regulating competition is actively hampering it. This is now playing out as Facebook asks if the costs of the media “bargain” may exceed the benefits it gets from contributors’ curation of news output. It is no surprise this will lead to the flourishing of fake news. So much for the concern about the importance of preserving a strong fourth estate. The government criticises Facebook for taking a commercial decision thus removing the figleaf of the use of the word “bargain”.
While the Morrison government continues to indulge in its never ending marketing campaign, led by Scotty from marketing, of which the Google/Facebook fiasco is just one instalment, and inspired by fear, the shonky product that is the Liberal Coalition government will continue to be preferred over the alternative, a progressive Labor government that actually brought progress and pride to Australia a decade ago, and is poised to do it again.
I would go for for the far more sinister! It has been impossible to get the mainstream media to publish even the minutest story with regards to systemic corruption and abuse by the Australian Legal Profession/Judiciary of the normal every day Australian for the past fifteen years. The shutting down of face book is just another well planned part of muzzling the every day Australian which will continue to allow the plunder of this nation by the unaccountable lawyer elite. When one walks behind the looking glass one sees the horror movie that is currently being played out. A reality that our mainstream media refuses to bring to the eyes of the Australian public for fear of the devil named Sue.
The game being played by the Australian Government Murduck and Face Book APPEARS TO BE FAR MORE SINISTER. I CAN NO LONGER SHARE PAGES FROM Lawyers or grave robbers I cannot even write the link into this post. AS IT IS DEEMED TO BE A MEDIA SITE by FACEBOOK.
It’s a large part to do with always protecting Rupert Murdoch and now Nine Entertainment’s Liberal Party propaganda newspapers.
Its old school print media monopoly that they are supporting against social media platform monopolies. If they had any decency they would play one against the other to get the best deal for Australians, but when Murdoch controls 70% of the media here, and Nine Entertainment controls a fair part of the rest of the Liberal Party propaganda machine (including Macquarie Broadcasting), their only concern is to protect these biased pro-Liberal liars, and keep the cosy relationship in place.
We do have a ‘choice’. Get screwed by the Murdoch media, or get screwed by US Big Tech!
Yes we do have a choice to play one off against the other, if we had a competent government, but the government is making sure its main conservative and supportive propaganda machine stays in place and so is only taking one side.
When you have idiots in control, the only results that you will get will be the results of idiots. More than 7 years and waiting, and we are still playing games, lying our teeth off, and running sideshows to appeal to nationalist sentiment – there is all the time in the world to waste when you are an idiot. You can even work part time as chief idiot. Especially when other idiots in the media show so much support for idiocy.
May I say also that the rise of independent media in this country such as P&I and Michael West Media and many more, that is more indicative of why many in the mainstream news services are struggling. It’s not just about social media. It is because their news is now so reduced to biased junk food for the mind designed to appeal to a simplistic understanding of the world, one where people are encouraged not to think, or even question the current leadership, and just accept the biased rubbish they are told. It is a parent-child relationship where only daddy gets the right to tell the fairy story while the reader or listener is supposed to accept and swallow the bias. The rest of the time its about distractions to hide the really important news that should actually be told.
It’s more than that. Think about how many people now read a paper newspaper in their public transport commute. How many drive. “News” is entertainment and now entertainment travels better in your pocket than in a rolled-up paper. Even a paperback. Reading my paper SMH on Sunday as part of my electronic subscription, I was struck with how little there was there that interested me. Certainly not worth a (loss-making) $3.90.
If it was not for providing a vehicle for the proprietors’ opinions would 16th-century technology have been abandoned by now?
Here’s a few provided by Michael West from his website:
https://www.michaelwest.com.au/where-can-australians-find-trustworthy-news-and-opinion/
The Saturday Paper for example started with offering three free articles but now they they are doing well enough through subscriptions, so you have to subscribe to read any article.
Of course newspapers have shifted online, but that is still the same format from the paper edition companies from the original print media companies compared to the social media platform. With electronic media people could be accessing anything now wherever they are, including independent media in whatever format it chooses.
As you say: ” I was struck with how little there was there that interested me. Certainly not worth a (loss-making) $3.90.”
That’s the very point
I’m saying that the mainstream media is losing business not only through social media platforms as claimed, but also because of the poor content and political proclivities they clearly represent.
Independent media is very much on the rise, as well as accessing other sources of news outside the country. There’s also been a shift from far better journalists that used to work in mainstream to those independent sites.
The better journalists have gone, sometimes to universities to write for The Conversation. Sadly, The Conversation has accepted its thirty pieces of silver and the poor coverage of this issue could be seen as the cost. Even Margaret Symonds on ABC Life Matters this morning was disappointing when it came to analysing the “solution” to preserving (good) journalism.
I guess Media Bites could not be expected to take the issue seriously https://cutt.ly/ZlfCPEW. Will tonight’s episode be any better? Given the short term revenue stakes involved for the ABC (possibly at the expense of future government money), this will be a real test of its important editorial independence. Media Watch might (wisely) concentrate on Brittany Higgins.
One day someone might explain the giants’ imbalance of (financial) power as many paid references emanating from them are to non-news websites. This is advertising (or knowledge sharing to use a wider term), traditional media could never service. And what does “getting their news from…” mean?
The person in control is no idiot but a very cunning person who killed the carbon tax but is now behind a new tax the proceeds of which flow directly to him rather than via Consolidated Revenue where they would be subject to scrutiny and regulation.
Yes, very clever in terms of playing games, but he is an absolute idiot in what he stands for.
We are talking about the heads of two different organisations in this thread although they are in the same effective team: NewsCorp and the LNP. I am referring to the first of these.
Ok, I was referring to the latter from the beginning, but it could be interpreted either way.
While one can be very clever looking after one’ s own interests and pushing certain political views for a few in the billionaires club, at the current point in time, it is heightened stupidity to be playing games over climate change, delivering fake news for the sake of the same wealthy interest groups, pushing for the next war with China, and aiding Trump as both have done. We will all pay a terrible price for that.
Stupidity or settled government policy?
I doesn’t matter
But it would be important to use the correct term. Assuming anyone cared. Sadly some I know know can’t get the heads around the issue. Which of course is another aspect of how cunning the policy is.
The policy is derived from the same thinking in the first place, whether Murdoch, Abbott or Morrison. I am not wanting to euphemise it with another name like ‘policy’ which in many ways makes it look acceptable.