Big Tech aggregators must split revenue fairly with news content creators: I&B Secretary

I&B Secretary says that apart from digital news publishers, the fate of the traditional print news industry and the future of journalism, the fourth pillar of a democracy, are also at stake.

FIle photo of Information and Broadcasting Secretary Apurva Chandra. | Photo Credit: PIB

Publishers of digital news platforms, being creators of original content, should get a fair share of revenue from big-tech platforms which act as aggregators, Information and Broadcasting Secretary Apurva Chandra said on Friday. 

Through an e-mailed statement read at the Digital News Publishers Association (DNPA) media conference, Mr. Chandra said that post-COVID, there have been issues regarding the financial health of not just the digital news industry, but also the parent print news industry. 

“For the growth of the news industry, it is important that the digital news platform of all these publishers which are the creators of original content get a fair share of the revenue from the Big Tech platforms which act as an aggregator of the content created by others,” he said. 

Journalism’s future at stake

Mr. Chandra said: “It is clear that if the traditional news industry continues to be negatively impacted, the future of journalism, our Fourth Pillar, is also hit. Thus, this is a question of journalism and credible content as well.” 

The I&B Secretary noted that Australia, Canada, France and European Union had taken the initiative through their legislatures and strengthening of their competition commissions to ensure a fair split of revenue among the creators of news content and the aggregators. 

The DNPA, which organised the event in association with the exchange4media Group, is the umbrella organisation for the digital platforms of 17 top news publishers. 

“They have a history of service to the nation. I understand that they have in place adequate systems of checks and balances to ensure that correct and factual news flows out and are a good example of our stated policy of self-regulation,” he said. 

The Australian example

Speaking to The Hindu on the sidelines of the conclave, Paul Fletcher, a Member of the Australian Parliament -- who was key in developing the media bargaining code that forced Big Tech platforms in that country to negotiate better deals with news publishers -- highlighted three fundamental reasons necessitating a policy response. 

First, he said, it was a competition policy matter. The Big Tech platforms competed in the market for digital advertising with other media platforms; at the same time, they were using the content generated and paid for by those news media businesses to attract eyeballs, and monetised that through advertising. 

“Second, this is a media policy issue, because the impact of unfair competition was in turn causing news media businesses to have reduced revenues and profitability, which in turn erodes the monies used to fund journalism, which means journalists were losing their jobs, which led to journalism reducing in quality. It was a negative feedback loop,” he said. 

Thirdly, he said, “we saw this as a very important issue in a liberal democracy, where it’s important to have a diverse and vigorous news media”.