Editorial: Commerce Commission decision on Google, Meta a step forward for NZ news media

Revenue streams around Meta, formerly known as Facebook, have traditionally been one-way traffic. Photo / Tony Avelar, AP, File

Editorial

EDITORIAL

A provisional decision from the Commerce Commission this week on news content being carried on social media networks should be welcomed by all who appreciate a strong and independent press.

On Tuesday morning, the commission announced provisionally authorising the News Publishers' Association of New Zealand to collectively negotiate terms and conditions on which participating news media companies' content is displayed on the digital platforms of Meta and Google.

The announcement effectively allows affected news media companies - including NZ Herald publisher New Zealand Media and Entertainment (NZME) - to jointly commence collective bargaining while the Commission continues to consider their authorisation application and reach a concluded view on whether the conduct should be allowed.

The Commission notes the decision to grant provisional authorisation should not be taken as an indication that it is likely to grant or decline the application for authorisation.

However, the Commission recognises the likely benefits associated with the collective negotiation in this case, and that there is value in realising those benefits sooner rather than later.

This is a pragmatic step forward in a protracted situation. Local news organisations have battled Silicon Valley giants such as Facebook and Google for more than a decade.

As part of the rapid expansion of the world wide web, social media exploded across the globe, and news content became swept up with all other material published across the internet. News organisations largely continued to operate as they always had, but the social media companies profited from the content while contributing little, if anything, to its creation.

The problem of how to fund in-depth journalism and news that matters to specific regions and communities became increasingly difficult to resolve while the social media machine grew at pace, lapping up both news content and advertising revenue.

Individual news companies held little leverage against multi-national giants and requests to negotiate brooked little headway.

The change began with a "bargaining code" introduced in Australia to help support the sustainability of the Australian news media sector by addressing the bargaining power imbalances between the global digital giants and Australian news businesses. In New Zealand, the News Publishers' Association has sought a similar authorisation.

Collective negotiation includes the potential for participating news media companies to pool their resources and reduce the transaction costs of negotiation.

Organisations such as the Herald have simply sought the opportunity to compete on a level playing field, with the scale to offer commercially realistic opposition to the global giants.

As the commission noted in its decision this week, allowing this provisional arrangement is unlikely to materially alter the market in a permanent way.

This is good news. As a nation, we need to recognise more the value of the fourth estate; one with the scope to dive more deeply into issues and range broadly across the country.

It needs the strength and security to keep doing its job, for all New Zealanders, as it has for almost 160 years.