Compromise can sound like a positive move. In this case it is not. In June 2023, Google announced it would block all links to news articles in Canada if that country’s government passed similar legislation to New Zealand’s – a law that ensures global tech giants pay for the news content they use.

The Canadian Government did a side-deal with Google, deciding what the news industry’s product was worth, presenting media companies with a “take it or leave it” C$100m a year from Google, far below the value of the news to the platform. It was an undercooked deal negotiated without the content owners, effectively putting global tech platforms on the same footing as sovereign states by allowing them to deal directly with governments rather than with the commercial entities whose content they are using.

In April last year, Google started removing links to Californian news websites as a “test” and the tactic worked there as well.

It’s as if a film distributor and the New Zealand Government decided how much Peter Jackson should be paid for his Lord of the Rings trilogy. Or an event promoter and the Government told Elton John how much he could charge for his concerts here.

These companies are already the most powerful in the world; why give them even greater power through the right to negotiate directly with governments over content that neither they, nor the legislators, own?

But in the battle for compensation for the local journalism which fuels advertising and audiences from which global giants profit, rational, fair-dealing arguments are often dismissed. And negotiating tactics – and threats – have giant consequences for our local news delivery and our democracy.

Back in 2021, when the Australian Government was becoming the first in the world to introduce legislation to enforce negotiation of payment for news, it was discovered that Google was adjusting its algorithms to block Australian news sites, as part of an “experiment”. The Australian Government held firm and the News Media Bargaining Code was passed.

Now, with the threats to remove news links from Google, in New Zealand, Media and Communications Minister Paul Goldsmith is facing a similar test of his mettle – will he capitulate to pressure and do a commercial deal directly with an international tech company without the support of the owners of the content?

Such a ‘compromise’ threatens to undermine the whole negotiation process, as it is essential that New Zealand’s media owners are at the table to determine the value of their own content, not to have it determined by Big Tech or the Government.

Google has also sought to position itself as the ethical Big Tech player in the battle for fair compensation. True, Google does make a contribution to media companies here, but it is for limited use of some content only and goes nowhere near paying for its wholesale use of New Zealand journalism. A large number of New Zealand media companies also miss out on these deals, such as small regional and specialist mastheads and magazine publishers, because they don’t meet the ‘rules’ set by Google.

It is important to acknowledge Google has made some effort, though it has been argued that this is simply part of the bid to avoid legislation. Other companies, meanwhile, are making no attempt to negotiate with New Zealand’s professional journalism companies.

And since the Fair Digital News Bargaining Bill was first tabled, Big Tech’s usage of New Zealand journalism has only increased, with tech companies now training their Large Language Models for Artificial Intelligence products on media companies’ content without permission and without the those media companies having the ability to stop this happening.

Again, global tech players are behaving as if they are above the laws of our land or the intentions of our elected legislators. These models, trained on high-quality journalism and other content, have allowed Big Tech to develop new products being rolled out now, designed to keep the user totally in their ecosystem with no value being sent back to the original creator.

Internationally, a fight back is underway. Earlier this year Google was fined €250m by French regulators for breaching an agreement over paying media companies for reproducing their content online. In the US it has been found guilty for acting illegally to dominate the $200 billion search market and is facing further claims of illegal behaviour to dominate the digital advertising world.

The US Department of Justice has just filed the penalties it wants the judge in that first trial to impose, to break up the monopoly. They include forcing Google to unveil its algorithms, the “indexes, data, feeds and models” that it uses for search results, including AI results.

Now that is a threat worth taking seriously.

For further information and details please contact Andrew Holden