The Government has committed to legislation aimed at making a fairer playing field for news media organisations’ pursuit of advertising dollars as it faces increasing competition with social media giants.
It comes same week as Newshub’s final broadcast on Friday and follows job losses across the wider sector, as well as an expected loss for TVNZ of between $28 million and $33 million in the 2024 financial year.
Media and Communications Minister Paul Goldsmith today announced the Government will progress an amended Fair Digital News Bargaining Bill, which is aimed at enabling fair bargaining between New Zealand news media entities and operators of digital platforms to support commercial arrangements for news content.
But not all Government parties agree — ACT has invoked its ‘agree to disagree’ clause in the coalition agreement – with leader David Seymour calling the bill a “sop”. Labour’s Willie Jackson said he supported the “intent” of the bill.
Goldsmith said the bill would support local media companies to earn revenue for the news they produce.
“I have looked closely at the design of the legislation and will be changing the approach to align more closely with the Australian digital bargaining code to give all companies greater certainty.
“The key change is adopting a ministerial designation framework. This will enable the Minister to decide which digital platforms are captured by the bill, allowing the Government to manage unintended consequences. We’ll also ensure an appropriate independent regulator is appointed as the Bill’s Authority.”
Goldsmith acknowledged ACT’s lack of support for the Bill and said all three coalition partners agreed ACT could hold that differing view.
“This means the bill will rely on the support of other parties to pass.
“In addition, much of the legislation underpinning our media landscape is outdated and stifling innovation. While full legislative review takes time, we are starting by removing outdated advertising restrictions for Sundays and public holidays.”
Goldsmith said the Government would also “tweak” eligibility criteria for the New Zealand Screen Production Rebate for local shows “with strong industry and cultural value, like our longest-running drama Shortland Street”.
He said he had spoken to NZ On Air about the role it could play in supporting local news and current affairs.
“They have committed to reporting back to Cabinet on progress by the end of the year.
“All of these short-term measures will be in effect by the end of this year.
“On a wider reform programme, proposals for a truly modern and streamlined regulatory landscape are currently under development and the Government will be announcing next steps later in 2024.”
Goldsmith took over the role from Melissa Lee in April after the Prime Minister Christopher Luxon sacked her from it, saying the role required a senior minister.
Recently, deals with Meta in Australia came to an end, leading to hundreds of job losses at networks Seven and Nine.
Second ‘agree to disagree’ so far
ACT’s invocation of the agree to disagree clause – a standard part of coalition agreements – is not the first time it’s been used under this Government: New Zealand First invoked it exactly a week ago today to disagree with the Covid-19 Royal Commission, arguing for a “new, broader, independent, and public inquiry”.
Today, ACT’s Seymour said the Fair Digital News Bargaining Bill was “a sop”.
“Even its supporters estimate it may only provide $30 million in revenue to all media companies, but revenue at TVNZ alone dropped by half that last year.
“The Bill’s a failed Labour inheritance our partners just can’t shrug off. It’s one of those things you do when you don’t know what else to do.”
Seymour said the Bill would not solve the “fundamental challenges” facing traditional media.
“It’s never been easier to share information online, but people don’t want the product on offer. This Bill is unlikely to change the underlying reality that media companies need to adapt, innovate, and provide a product customers want to buy, just like any other business.
“Media companies claim they need the Government to step in because internet companies are exploiting them. In my experience, it’s not always clear who needs who the most. Media firms get traffic from Google and Meta, they can’t prove they’re not benefiting from the internet firms.”
He said a the bill seemed like “an attempt to force one group of businesses to subsidise another”.
“But it’s not the role of government to protect businesses from the effects of competition and changing customer preferences.”
ACT was also concerned about unintended consequences from the Bill, he said.
“In Canada, Meta blocked users’ ability to share or view news content leading to a significant reduction in traffic to smaller, independent media websites and the government having to bail them out. And if news disappears from social media platforms, misinformation will take its place.
“It’s clear that New Zealand’s traditional media companies support this bill. They believe it would net them significant resources from their online competitors. But the real sums claimed don’t add up to a game changer.”
Seymour said the Government’s amendments to the original Bill – which was drafted under the Labour Government – “made it worse”.
“The involvement of an elected Minister in deciding who ultimately gets what takes away one of the main benefits of the whole scheme: that it doesn’t involve politicians. ACT worries that a Bill aimed at subsidising traditional media could undermine the separation between political actors and journalists who are meant to be an independent voice in our democracy.”
Labour Media and Communications spokesperson Willie Jackson said he was relieved the Government had seen “sense” and was progressing legislation to “make the media landscape fairer for news companies operating online”.
“We will take the time to look at the Government’s amendments, but support the intent of the bill.”
