A different playbook for the same outcome? Examining Google’s and Meta’s strategic responses to Australia’s News Media Bargaining Code

IF 4.5 1区 文学 Q1 COMMUNICATION New Media & Society Pub Date : 2024-03-06 DOI:10.1177/14614448241232296
Diana Bossio, Andrea Carson, James Meese
{"title":"A different playbook for the same outcome? Examining Google’s and Meta’s strategic responses to Australia’s News Media Bargaining Code","authors":"Diana Bossio, Andrea Carson, James Meese","doi":"10.1177/14614448241232296","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"In March 2021, Australia enacted the News Media Bargaining Code (NMBC) legislation, which compels Google and Meta to pay for third-party news content on their platforms. To date, Australian newsrooms have made deals with both platforms totalling approximately AUD$200 million (US$126.4 million). The 1-year review of the Code has prompted questions about not just the legislation but also the lack of public detail about the deals made between news organisations and the platforms. This article seeks to critically analyse the strategic positions both Google and Facebook took in supporting public interest journalism before and after the introduction of the Code. Using a mixed methodological approach, we find that both platforms differed in their strategic engagement with Australian media organisations before and after the introduction of the NMBC and that the Code, as it stands, risks increasing platform influence in the Australian news market.","PeriodicalId":19149,"journal":{"name":"New Media & Society","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":4.5000,"publicationDate":"2024-03-06","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"New Media & Society","FirstCategoryId":"98","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/14614448241232296","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"文学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"COMMUNICATION","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

In March 2021, Australia enacted the News Media Bargaining Code (NMBC) legislation, which compels Google and Meta to pay for third-party news content on their platforms. To date, Australian newsrooms have made deals with both platforms totalling approximately AUD$200 million (US$126.4 million). The 1-year review of the Code has prompted questions about not just the legislation but also the lack of public detail about the deals made between news organisations and the platforms. This article seeks to critically analyse the strategic positions both Google and Facebook took in supporting public interest journalism before and after the introduction of the Code. Using a mixed methodological approach, we find that both platforms differed in their strategic engagement with Australian media organisations before and after the introduction of the NMBC and that the Code, as it stands, risks increasing platform influence in the Australian news market.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
同样的结果,不同的玩法?考察谷歌和 Meta 对澳大利亚《新闻媒体谈判守则》的战略回应
2021 年 3 月,澳大利亚颁布了《新闻媒体谈判守则》(NMBC)立法,强制要求谷歌和 Meta 为其平台上的第三方新闻内容付费。迄今为止,澳大利亚新闻编辑室与这两个平台达成的交易总额约为 2 亿澳元(1.264 亿美元)。对《准则》为期一年的审查不仅引发了对立法的质疑,也引发了对新闻机构与平台之间的交易缺乏公开细节的质疑。本文试图批判性地分析《准则》出台前后,谷歌和 Facebook 在支持公益新闻报道方面所采取的战略立场。采用混合方法论的研究方法,我们发现这两个平台与澳大利亚媒体机构的战略合作在《国家媒体准则》出台前后有所不同,而《准则》目前的状况有可能会增加平台在澳大利亚新闻市场的影响力。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
New Media & Society
New Media & Society COMMUNICATION-
CiteScore
12.70
自引率
8.00%
发文量
274
期刊介绍: New Media & Society engages in critical discussions of the key issues arising from the scale and speed of new media development, drawing on a wide range of disciplinary perspectives and on both theoretical and empirical research. The journal includes contributions on: -the individual and the social, the cultural and the political dimensions of new media -the global and local dimensions of the relationship between media and social change -contemporary as well as historical developments -the implications and impacts of, as well as the determinants and obstacles to, media change the relationship between theory, policy and practice.
期刊最新文献
The psychology of volunteer moderators: Tradeoffs between participation, belonging, and norms in online community governance Faking, optimising and conceding to power: Social movement understandings of social media power A scoping review of studies on self-tracking for weight management: Social contexts and experiences of a practice Being and becoming in the culture of immediacy: An existential-ethical approach Opportunity structures for user acceptance of news recommender systems (NRS): A multi-country survey study of relationships between individual-level factors and evaluations of NRS
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1