Google Says it Will Stop Linking to New Zealand News if Law Passes Forcing it to Pay for Content

The Google logo is seen on the Google house at CES 2024, an annual consumer electronics trade show, in Las Vegas, Nevada, US, January 10, 2024. (Reuters)
The Google logo is seen on the Google house at CES 2024, an annual consumer electronics trade show, in Las Vegas, Nevada, US, January 10, 2024. (Reuters)
TT

Google Says it Will Stop Linking to New Zealand News if Law Passes Forcing it to Pay for Content

The Google logo is seen on the Google house at CES 2024, an annual consumer electronics trade show, in Las Vegas, Nevada, US, January 10, 2024. (Reuters)
The Google logo is seen on the Google house at CES 2024, an annual consumer electronics trade show, in Las Vegas, Nevada, US, January 10, 2024. (Reuters)

Google said Friday it will stop linking to New Zealand news content and will reverse its support of local media outlets if the government passes a law forcing tech companies to pay for articles displayed on their platforms.

The vow to sever Google traffic to New Zealand news sites — made in a blog post by the search giant on Friday — echoes strategies the firm deployed as Australia and Canada prepared to enact similar laws in recent years.

It followed a surprise announcement by New Zealand’s government in July that lawmakers would advance a bill forcing tech platforms to strike deals for sharing revenue generated from news content with the media outlets producing it.

The government, led by center-right National, had opposed the law in 2023 when introduced by the previous administration.

But the loss of more than 200 newsroom jobs earlier this year — in a national media industry that totaled 1,600 reporters at the 2018 census and has likely shrunk since — prompted the current government to reconsider forcing tech companies to pay publishers for displaying content.

The law aims to stanch the flow offshore of advertising revenue derived from New Zealand news products.

Google New Zealand Country Director Caroline Rainsford wrote Friday that the firm would change its involvement in the country’s media landscape if it passed.

“Specifically, we’d be forced to stop linking to news content on Google Search, Google News, or Discover surfaces in New Zealand and discontinue our current commercial agreements and ecosystem support with New Zealand news publishers,” she wrote.

Google’s licensing program in New Zealand contributed “millions of dollars per year to almost 50 local publications,” she added.

The News Publishers’ Association, a New Zealand sector group, said in a written statement Friday that Google’s pledge amounted to “threats” and reflected “the kind of pressure that it has been applying” to the government and news outlets, Public Affairs Director Andrew Holden said.

The government “should be able to make laws to strengthen democracy in this country without being subjected to this kind of corporate bullying,” he said.

Australia was the first country to attempt to force tech firms — including Google and Meta — to the bargaining table with news outlets through a law passed in 2021. At first, the tech giants imposed news blackouts for Australians on their platforms, but both eventually somewhat relented, striking deals reportedly worth 200 million Australian dollars ($137 million) a year, paid to Australian outlets for use of their content.

But Belinda Barnet, a media expert at Swinburne University in Melbourne, said Meta has refused to renew its contracts with Australian news media while Google is renegotiating its initial agreements.

As Canada prepared to pass similar digital news bargaining laws in 2023, Google and Meta again vowed to cease their support for the country’s media. Last November, however, Google promised to contribute 100 million Canadian dollars ($74 million) — indexed to inflation — in financial support annually for news businesses across the country.

Colin Peacock, an analyst who hosts the Mediawatch program on RNZ, New Zealand’s public radio broadcaster, said Google “doesn’t want headlines around the world that say another country has pushed back” by enacting such a law.

While Google pointed Friday to its support of local outlets, Peacock said one of its funding recipients – the publisher of a small newspaper – had told a parliamentary committee this year that the amount he received was “a pittance” and not enough to hire a single graduate reporter.

Minister for Media and Communications Paul Goldsmith told The Associated Press in a written statement on Friday that he was still consulting on the next version of the bill.

“My officials and I have met with Google on a number of occasions to discuss their concerns, and will continue to do so,” he said.

Goldsmith said in July that he planned to pass the law by the end of the year.

 

 

 

 

 

 



Social Media Companies Slam Australia's Under-16 ban

Social media companies slam Australia's under-16 ban - AFP
Social media companies slam Australia's under-16 ban - AFP
TT

Social Media Companies Slam Australia's Under-16 ban

Social media companies slam Australia's under-16 ban - AFP
Social media companies slam Australia's under-16 ban - AFP

Social media giants on Friday hit out at a landmark Australian law banning them from signing up under-16s, describing it as a rush job littered with "many unanswered questions".

The UN children's charity UNICEF Australia warned the law was no "silver bullet" against online harm and could push kids into "covert and unregulated" spaces online.

The legislation, approved by parliament on Thursday, orders social media firms to take "reasonable steps" to prevent young teens from having accounts, AFP reported. It is due to come into effect after a year.
Prime Minister Anthony Albanese said the age limit may not be implemented perfectly -- much like existing restrictions on alcohol -- but it was "the right thing to do".

The crackdown on sites like Facebook, Instagram and X would lead to "better outcomes and less harm for young Australians", he told reporters.

Platforms have a "social responsibility" to make children's safety a priority, Albanese said.

Social media firms that fail to comply with the law face fines of up to Aus$50 million (US$32.5 million) for "systemic breaches".

TikTok said it was "disappointed" in the law, accusing the government of ignoring mental health, online safety and youth experts who had opposed the ban.

"It's entirely likely the ban could see young people pushed to darker corners of the internet where no community guidelines, safety tools, or protections exist," a TikTok spokesperson said.

Tech companies said that despite the law's perceived shortcomings, they would engage with the government in shaping how it could be implemented in the next 12 months.

The legislation offers almost no details on how the rules will be enforced -- prompting concern among experts that it will be largely symbolic.

Members of the public appeared doubtful.

"I don't think it will actually change a lot because I don't see that there's really a strong way to police it," 41-year-old Emily Beall told AFP in Melbourne.

Arthur McCormack, 19, said some things he had seen on social media when he was younger were "sort of traumatic".

"I think it's good that the government is on this ban. But in terms of enforcement, I'm not sure how it will be carried out," he said.

Meta -- owner of Facebook and Instagram -- called for consultation on the rules to ensure a "technically feasible outcome that does not place an onerous burden on parents and teens".

- 'Serious concerns' -

But Meta said it was concerned "about the process, which rushed the legislation through while failing to properly consider the evidence, what industry already does to ensure age-appropriate experiences, and the voices of young people".

A Snapchat spokesperson said the company had raised "serious concerns" about the law and that "many unanswered questions" remained about how it would work.

But the company said it would engage closely with the government to develop an approach balancing "privacy, safety and practicality".

UNICEF Australia policy chief Katie Maskiell said young people need to be protected online but also included in the digital world.

"This ban risks pushing children into increasingly covert and unregulated online spaces as well as preventing them from accessing aspects of the online world essential to their wellbeing," she said.

Leo Puglisi, a 17-year-old online journalist based in Melbourne, was critical of the legislation.

He founded streaming channel 6 News, which provides hourly news bulletins on national and international issues, in 2019 at the age of 11.

- Global attention -

"We've been built up by having 13 to 15-year-olds see 6 News online and then join the team," Puglisi said in a statement.

"We have said that this ban seriously risks restricting creativity from our young people, no matter what passion or future career they want to explore," he added.

One of the biggest issues will be privacy -- what age-verification information is used, how it is collected and by whom.

Social media companies remain adamant that age verification should be the job of app stores, but the government believes tech platforms should be responsible.

Exemptions will likely be granted to some companies, such as WhatsApp and YouTube, which teenagers may need to use for recreation, school work or other reasons.

The legislation will be closely monitored by other countries, with many weighing whether to implement similar bans.

Lawmakers from Spain to Florida have proposed social media bans for young teens, although none of the measures have been implemented yet.

China has restricted access for minors since 2021, with under-14s not allowed to spend more than 40 minutes a day on Douyin, the Chinese version of TikTok.