Australians visiting Google in recent days have received a message from the company, a single line below the search box:
If you click on the link, it takes you to this open letter:
Open letter to Australians
We need to let you know about new Government regulation that will hurt how Australians use Google Search and YouTube.A proposed law, the News Media Bargaining Code, would force us to provide you with a dramatically worse Google Search and YouTube, could lead to your data being handed over to big news businesses, and would put the free services you use at risk in Australia.
The way Aussies search every day on Google is at risk from new regulation
You’ve always relied on Google Search and YouTube to show you what’s most relevant and helpful to you. We could no longer guarantee that under this law. The law would force us to give an unfair advantage to one group of businesses – news media businesses – over everyone else who has a website, YouTube channel or small business. News media businesses alone would be given information that would help them artificially inflate their ranking over everyone else, even when someone else provides a better result. We’ve always treated all website owners fairly when it comes to information we share about ranking. The proposed changes are not fair and they mean that Google Search results and YouTube will be worse for you.Your Search data may be at risk
You trust us with your data and our job is to keep it safe. Under this law, Google has to tell news media businesses “how they can gain access” to data about your use of our products. There’s no way of knowing if any data handed over would be protected, or how it might be used by news media businesses.Hurting the free services you use
We deeply believe in the importance of news to society. We partner closely with Australian news media businesses — we already pay them millions of dollars and send them billions of free clicks every year. We’ve offered to pay more to license content. But rather than encouraging these types of partnerships, the law is set up to give big media companies special treatment and to encourage them to make enormous and unreasonable demands that would put our free services at risk.This law wouldn’t just impact the way Google and YouTube work with news media businesses — it would impact all of our Australian users, so we wanted to let you know. We’re going to do everything we possibly can to get this proposal changed so we can protect how Search and YouTube work for you in Australia and continue to build constructive partnerships with news media businesses — not choose one over the other.
You’ll hear more from us in the coming days — stay tuned.
Thank you,
Mel Silva, Managing Director, on behalf of Google Australia
This is an emotive campaign by Google, arguing points not core to the proposed code. Google understands people better than most businesses thanks to the data they have. I get why they are arguing through an emotive narrative it makes sense. An article at The Conversation discusses the issue.
In my opinion, the planned move by the federal government is an interference in the free market economy, something the current government claims to hold dear.
News outlets have sought to be listed on Google and other online platforms. They have done this using techniques to lift their rankings online. They have done this deliberately, when they could have, alternatively, blocked their sites from being listed. They are where they are because, in part, of their actions.
News outlets have, from time to time, also encouraged the sharing of their stories on online platforms.
I get that news outlets don’t like that Google and other platforms have taken their ad revenue. That’s competition as they well know. I think the loss of ad revenue is the core issue here. Publishers need to realise the world has changed and that old media platforms, newspapers, TV and radio are not as interesting to consumers as they used to be. That’s not the fault of Google and others.
This move by the government looks and feels like pandering to media giants like News Corp. It’s political, and as such is not, in my view, good policy. This is demonstrated by the government exclusion of public broadcasters from benefiting from the proposed legislation.
The ACCC, responding to Google’s open letter says A healthy news media sector is essential to a well-functioning democracy. I don’t see the code as facilitating a healthy news media. One could argue that the extraordinary concentration of media ownership, especially newspapers and related online platforms, in Australia is a considerably bigger challenge to democracy.
I hope the code does not get up as it would set a precedent for government intervention. Indeed, it reminds me of 1999 when the government facilitated the taking away of the exclusive and protected status of newsagents for the distribution of print media products in Australia. It did this without supportive compensation for newsagents. Newsagents were told it’s business, suck it up, we’re not going to protect you.
News outlets worried about their journalism being on platforms like Google can stop this themselves. That is what they should do. However, I suspect that is not their concern as much as is the collapse in ad revenue.
Google, Facebook and others are not heroes in my view. I wish they would make a heftier tax contribution in Australia based on considerable revenue. I wish they did not engage in tax minimisation. schemes that reduced the contribution they make to Australia and Australians. Indeed, I wish that of all big businesses, including big media outlets.
Hmm, now there’s a thought, how much could Australian journalism benefit from big media companies that do engage in tax minimisation through offshore arrangements not doing so? Plenty, I suspect.
The Guardian has provided good analysis as to the proposed legislation and why Google is opposed to it.
I happen to agree with you on this Mark. The government is pandering to its big media friends. There is no benefit for Australians in this new code.
It surprises me how quick the government is moving on this yet how slow they have been on the NDIS and other more important reforms. It goes to show it’s who you know.
I think your missing the main point Mark. The number of journalists has been decimated by the big tech companies. Meanwhile they benefit enormously from this “free” content. So, they don’t employ many people and they don’t pay their fair share of tax. At least the old media companies employed journalists. Both sides of the media political spectrum have had to cut thousands of journalists and that has got to be bad for democracy.
No, Peter, I have not missed the point. News Corp, Nine Media and plenty of politicians support a free market economy. The proposed new code is against the free market.
Journos are losing jobs because ad revenue is fleeing bug media. This code does not address that.
News outlets should have acted as the Seattle PI did 11 years ago. They have demonstrated how to make it work.
I understand the situation well.
We will have to disagree on this one. “Journos are losing jobs because ad revenue is fleeing big media” . Exactly, big tech is using journalistic content for FREE. Too many new “disrupters” are not paying their way and hiding behind “we are different, new and exciting and the rules don’t apply to us”. It’s about time the Rules do apply to them and if they keep fighting it, there will be a political solution and so should there be. I understand the situation well too and believe it or not, you are not always right. 😉
Peter there is no evidence to support your claim. Media companies are on search engines because they want to be. They can easily remove themselves from those platforms.
Search engines are attracting ads because that is where eyeballs are and eyeballs are not there for news. Some are, but it is not the key traffic driver. It is all the individual sites and online shopping sites that drive search engine traffic.
I live and breathe online traffic analysis. I pay to access the data.
The media outlets are spinning their spin because they have failed to adapt.
Mark, you’re too easily dismissive, to say eyeballs are not there for news. Of course online news is a massive driver of online traffic and advertising. It’s also disingenuous to say traditional media can simply remove itself from online platforms. Even if they could totally remove themselves it would signal their death knell.
Then what for expensive journalism, there will be only pockets left and we’ll all be the poorer for it. Like other tech companies Google want their cake and eat it too. They want all the upside with no costs, no tax and no sense of social responsibility. Mark my words Mark, if they don’t change their attitude and give some ground they will have changes forced upon them by Republicans, Democrats, Labor or Liberal. The pressure for changes is growing as rapidly as their market share and share price.
Peter, you don’t know the data I have accessed or the reports I have read to reach my conclusions. You have no reference point for saying I am too easily dismissive. Just because I disagree with your opinion does not mean my point is wrong or invalid.
News is on search engines because publishers want it there. If the revenue drain is there because of it, which I doubt, they created the issue.
I am not a Google booster, not by a long shot. However, on this issue, the news companies are at fault. They are trying to go against a free market approach and seek subsidisation from a platform that, frankly, does not need news outlets.
In my opinion, the proposed code is wrong. You disagree, which you’re entitled to do.
They “don’t need news outlets”. Ok, fair enough, then let’s get all the cards on the table and Google can block all news outlets from its platform. Oh wait, users would complain and a rival search engine would fill the void. It’s a commercial imperative that Google have access to news and information. They are gaining that commercial imperative for FREE and making a fortune off it. You can spin it any way you like, but Google are making a motza from the hard work of journalists, without having to pay a cent.
Peter, no evidence has been presented anywhere that Google, re news is gaining that commercial imperative for FREE and making a fortune off it. News Corp and Nine media claim it as do politicians, but no evidence has been presented. I doubt it. But, again, it’s my opinion and yours is yours.
I’ll say it again Mark. Let Google go without news and see how that works for their business model. News is integral to their large profit making machine and to say otherwise is disingenuous at best.
Thanks for the disingenuous label Peter. There is no evidence to support your claim of the profit from news. As for them doing without news, that’s up to them, just as is being smarter about business is up to News Corp and Nine Media.
Well, I for one will miss the investigative journalism of Adele Ferguson and others, when the Age bites the dust. Google needs to either make fair compensation for the journalistic content it uses or block all news sites from its platform. It doesn’t want to do either. The former would displease shareholders and the latter would threaten its very existence.
Wow this one is certainly going to be a battle of the empires old v new with the government on this occasion looking to back and protect the old empire headed by the ageing Lord Rupert. With 10,000 Australian employees and many others in associated industries such as ours I can see their reasoning. Presently Google provides 1200 Australian jobs & Facebook only 120.
Only problem is Lord Rupert also doesn’t see the future in his old media so he is no longer investing in its old platforms and Australian jobs. We see this with the increasing closure of regional and community newspapers across the country and we shouldn’t be fooled that this is all the doing of the evil new empires.
Mark you are right the government needs to look at ways of increasing their tax take from each of the players. With little contribution to the overall economy from the digital platforms new increased taxes on these platforms are the key.
Steve, there are no “evil new empires”. The new tech companies are forging a similar path to the old. The problem I have is that Google is just a content aggregator. With news they suck away all the advertising revenue and unlike the old media, make no contribution to the the very important democratic institution of a healthy and diverse media. Google only care about eyeballs, they don’t give a damn about investigative journalism. It doesn’t matter to them whether a news outlet exists in regional Australia or not. It didn’t really matter to old media either, but their business model lent itself to supporting journalism in return for advertising. If we want a world in which big business and politicians are held to account by a strong media then Google must pay. Otherwise ban them from having news content and let the market provide a new search engine that will support journalism.
I beleive that Google is a leech product sucking out the lifeb;ood of other enterprises.
As for Rupert he is having a bet each way with the longer odds in favour of electronic news as far as contaent and print in the short term suffering in content an extreme suffering advertising as a result.
The footy scores in the newsapers under sport are see http://www..the name of the newspaper..Why bother?
The are cannibalising their own product trying to force the reader to what they need which is the more cost effective not necessarilary the best income producing result.