The reality is, this bill has the potential to devastate local news.
If Goldsmith believes that companies like Meta and Google will willingly agree to pay for local news, he is misguided. He only needs to look at Canada, which introduced a similar media bargaining bill, to see the dire consequences.
Meta simply blocked and banned news websites from posting material to Facebook, dramatically impacting the local media landscape. This led to negative outcomes for Canadian news outlets. The Canadian law not only failed to generate revenue from Meta for news producers, but it also drastically reduced user traffic to their websites from Meta’s social media platforms.
Small local news outlets that heavily relied on Facebook to draw audiences to their websites are now struggling. In an interview with VOA in February, Rene J. Roy, co-founder of Wreckhouse Press, a small local news outlet and publisher in Newfoundland, said, “the Canadian government has done more damage to Canadian media than they intended. I think they destroyed small media.” Roy added, “As a result, our business will not survive six months. It’s certainly not a good feeling to know the Canadian government is responsible for this.”
Meta said when the Canadian government introduced its legislation, “It was based on the incorrect premise that Meta benefits unfairly from news content shared on our platforms, when the reverse is true. News outlets voluntarily share content on Facebook and Instagram to expand their audiences and improve their bottom line.”
Goldsmith claims to support more local voices across New Zealand, but this bill will achieve the opposite, limiting reach and engagement across social media platforms for news organisations that rely on Facebook.
Is Goldsmith aware that both Stuff and NZME are shutting down many of their community publications? While these are commercial decisions, the so-called Fair Bargaining bill will worsen the situation for these affected communities.
Facebook was an essential tool for many people in Christchurch concerned about the potential tsunami risk following the North Canterbury earthquakes. It also proved indispensable during serious breaking news events, including the wildfires on the Christchurch Port Hills.
Goldsmith told Newstalk ZB, “the media has to figure out how to survive in a difficult world,” yet his misguided bill will only make it harder. He’s already admitted that Facebook and Google aren’t keen on the bill, so why is he pressing ahead with it, knowing it will kill off local news?
News websites, particularly smaller local ones, rely on Facebook to disseminate their articles. Facebook has been crucial, allowing independent local news to reach thousands of people across the Canterbury region.
This bill will sever community connections, leaving relationships up to misguided rumours, gossip, and innuendo on community pages. Is that what Goldsmith wants for New Zealand? To limit local news? Or does he naively think he can win over the most powerful companies on the planet?
Proposing to give ministers the authority to decide which news organisations sit at the negotiating table is beyond misguided.
This bill is a disaster waiting to happen. It will stifle local media, diminish community engagement, and open the floodgates to misinformation, while potentially allowing legacy media to thrive in a contracted environment.
Paul Goldsmith needs to realise the catastrophic impact his bill will have on the very fabric of local journalism he claims to support.
Broadcaster Chris Lynch is an award winning journalist who also produces Christchurch news and video content for domestic and international companies. Chris blogs at Chris Lynch Media - where this article was sourced.
Meta simply blocked and banned news websites from posting material to Facebook, dramatically impacting the local media landscape. This led to negative outcomes for Canadian news outlets. The Canadian law not only failed to generate revenue from Meta for news producers, but it also drastically reduced user traffic to their websites from Meta’s social media platforms.
Small local news outlets that heavily relied on Facebook to draw audiences to their websites are now struggling. In an interview with VOA in February, Rene J. Roy, co-founder of Wreckhouse Press, a small local news outlet and publisher in Newfoundland, said, “the Canadian government has done more damage to Canadian media than they intended. I think they destroyed small media.” Roy added, “As a result, our business will not survive six months. It’s certainly not a good feeling to know the Canadian government is responsible for this.”
Meta said when the Canadian government introduced its legislation, “It was based on the incorrect premise that Meta benefits unfairly from news content shared on our platforms, when the reverse is true. News outlets voluntarily share content on Facebook and Instagram to expand their audiences and improve their bottom line.”
Goldsmith claims to support more local voices across New Zealand, but this bill will achieve the opposite, limiting reach and engagement across social media platforms for news organisations that rely on Facebook.
Is Goldsmith aware that both Stuff and NZME are shutting down many of their community publications? While these are commercial decisions, the so-called Fair Bargaining bill will worsen the situation for these affected communities.
Facebook was an essential tool for many people in Christchurch concerned about the potential tsunami risk following the North Canterbury earthquakes. It also proved indispensable during serious breaking news events, including the wildfires on the Christchurch Port Hills.
Goldsmith told Newstalk ZB, “the media has to figure out how to survive in a difficult world,” yet his misguided bill will only make it harder. He’s already admitted that Facebook and Google aren’t keen on the bill, so why is he pressing ahead with it, knowing it will kill off local news?
News websites, particularly smaller local ones, rely on Facebook to disseminate their articles. Facebook has been crucial, allowing independent local news to reach thousands of people across the Canterbury region.
This bill will sever community connections, leaving relationships up to misguided rumours, gossip, and innuendo on community pages. Is that what Goldsmith wants for New Zealand? To limit local news? Or does he naively think he can win over the most powerful companies on the planet?
Proposing to give ministers the authority to decide which news organisations sit at the negotiating table is beyond misguided.
This bill is a disaster waiting to happen. It will stifle local media, diminish community engagement, and open the floodgates to misinformation, while potentially allowing legacy media to thrive in a contracted environment.
Paul Goldsmith needs to realise the catastrophic impact his bill will have on the very fabric of local journalism he claims to support.
Broadcaster Chris Lynch is an award winning journalist who also produces Christchurch news and video content for domestic and international companies. Chris blogs at Chris Lynch Media - where this article was sourced.
4 comments:
Perhaps this is actually a clever move. Most media in NZ are left wing and one-sided on many important issues. They are certainly not in any way happy with either the new coalition, or the direction it is going.
This same media has been demanding this law be passed as they are dumb enough to believe it will save them. So they have been given what they have demanded, even though it will possibly destroy them. They cannot blame the existing government for agreeing to their demands, the government gets to wash their hands of a bunch that is so entitled they have lost touch with reality.
So a win for the coalition, a well deserved loss for the media.
If NZ First pulls its support for this bill will National and Labour pass it together anyway?
TVNZ and Three need to go the way of the dodo and become extinct. If publications want paying subscribers they'll need to put their articles behind a paywall and people will need to pay. However the content will need to actually be valuable so that people want it.
You couldn't offer many people subscriptions to the Herald and other outlets right now.
Oh How the Govt "fail to read the room, especially when Mark Zuckerburg, is sitting in the corner"!
Oh the other point, do we believe in what Canada did to "reduce Social media from gaining in news funding" or was it to reduce social media news being accessed by everyday Canadians. Yup Master Trudeau is more nastier on what news is broadcast & by who/whom - you only have to go to YouTube and research what "off the grid media outlets have to say".
if theyre so intent on bringing in this stupid bill then why dont they make it optional instead of a blanket rule?
eg. only ban the use of "news" from those outlets that want the money?
that way scum legacy media can continue to fail due to their greed and inability to adapt and the likes of chris lynch, the ppatform, rcr etc can prosper through social media.
Post a Comment
Thanks for engaging in the debate!
Because this is a public forum, we will only publish comments that are respectful and do NOT contain links to other sites. We appreciate your cooperation.