Tech giants won’t change their spots, no matter how hard the government, ACCC, and publishers try
Flimsy brand boycotts and attempted government intervention won’t be enough to hurt Facebook and Google, Sabri Suby argues. And the ACCC’s plan to make the tech giants pay for news will ultimately hurt, not help, news outlets, he says.
Earlier this week, the ACCC announced it’s taking Google to court for allegedly misleading Australians to get more data to use in targeted advertising. And by the end of this week, the watchdog is expected to publish draft rules forcing Facebook and Google to share revenue generated from news with the original publishers.
Over in the US right now, there’s yet another Senate hearing featuring Facebook’s Mark Zuckerberg and Google’s Sundar Pichai. These are just a few more examples of governments trying to force the tech giants to change: attempts that have failed at every turn.
Australia’s Digital Platforms Inquiry, the U.S. Senate hearing, and various brand boycotts have all resulted in nothing but tiny shifts that made absolutely zero dent in Facebook or Google’s bottom line.
Suit the whim of the government? Government provides legislation, privacy & protection of its citizens so we can function in a democratic society. It’s well-documented there is negligent misuse of that information by big tech and why the most important ANTITRUST hearing of the century is currently taking place in Washington. Traditional TRUSTED media publishers have lasted decades and 15 years of “historical” social & search “media” companies who have made billions in revenue off the back of these media without paying for their content are wallowing in DISTRUST- FB the most distrusted brand in Australia. Legislation is coming and big tech is on notice.
I agree. And you’re suggestion is the practical one if you want to survive.
But I think the bigger issue is that most advertisers (clients) measure an impression as an impression simply due to ease of reporting. Regardless of who, what, where, how, time-spent, or even if it was actually seen. 0.1 secs of exposure to a person with no money, is just as good as 3 minutes with a person who has a willingness to spend, come powerpoint time. Hell, even in real time.
It’s an audience valuation issue, and a media space validation issue. Created through sheer data laziness. And publishers copped the hit.
You’re right, but there’s no point having a loyal, unique following of 100,000 people if that audience is valued the same way clients value a bikini model influencer’s 100,000 followers. That’s the real challenge facing publishers.
Well said.
The companies will just be given a fine but there will be no changes to the very issues they are being questioned on.
The companies get fined pocket money and the businesses it directly impacts remain out of pocket due to the abuse of anti competitive laws which were last changes in 1950.
So, journalists and news providers get paid by big tech to publish their content, and big tech can now source content and become a trusted channel. Surely this is a step in the right direction for all parties, not to mention connecting consumers and brands in a credible way.
This is such a typical comment from someone who has most likely spent their entire career at a traditional media owner.
As in the article above and the comments below, there will simply be a fine and the world will keep turning. Big tech have already agreed to toss journos a crumb, so be grateful.
Finally, if you want to talk about “TRUST”, ask the average person how much they “TRUST” anything NewsCorp publishes. I rest my case.
With enough will, the US Government will push anti-trust and force them to break up. That will hurt their bottom line. Big tech knows this and is therefore inclined to make attempts to play nice.
Ah Google, acts like a monopoly against competition. But a benevolent social good when it comes to PR.
On the whole have contributed a net negative to the world so let the legislation continue.
A heap of obvious and broad strategic advice in here for traditional media owners without any specific or actionable points they could actually use. No value in this article for anyone that isn’t operating a business which makes majority of its revenue from working with the two big tech platforms. Wonder HOW the author would go about fixing these problems for news publishers rather than just outlining WHAT needs to be fixed. Yawn.
With the Google/FB news deplatforming coming real soon now, Murdoch and Nine need to diversify their income streams away from celebrity pap, graft, government handouts, blackmail and extortion.
Perhaps they could invest into actual journalism instead of peddling worthless propaganda and clickbait that consumers won’t pay for. Just a thought.