Media in motion

Yet again, it’s been a tumultuous time for the media. Last month the UK’s Press Gazette unveiled a live tracker to monitor mistakes resulting from the use of AI in journalism. Tomorrow the last weekday printed edition of the Northern Daily Leader hits the streets of Tamworth. And all the while we’re in the thick of a media stoush for the ages, a media melee with the lot: big personalities; surprising revelations; and eye-watering claims. Right before our eyes, the heaviest of media heavyweights are slugging it out for what they say is fair. And, of course, cash.

Kyle, Jackie O and ARN? No! I’m talking about the News Bargaining Incentive. Last month, the government released its draft legislation for the new scheme, which aims to redirect funds from digital platforms to news media. It builds upon the News Media Bargaining Code (NMBC) introduced in 2021. As I explained to Danny Chifley on 2SER Breakfast this week, ‘If you break it down, we’re just talking about getting some of the big digital platforms to pay for news content.’

Beyond that, of course, there’s a lot to digest. The draft legislation that would establish the Incentive itself is set out in three short proposed Bills, with most of the mechanics in the ‘Administration Bill’. The draft Bill imposes a charge of 2.25% on the Australian revenue of large platform companies with annual Australian revenue in excess of $250m that provide ‘significant’ social media and search services. These are essentially the largest digital platforms, but the draft Bill does exclude some types of service, meaning that messaging apps such as WhatsApp, professional networking platforms such as Linked In, and AI providers such as ChatGPT would not be included. Those are highly significant exclusions. Currently, the included platforms appear to be Google, Meta and TikTok.

That’s not the end of the story, because the amount a platform is liable to pay under the charge would be offset by amounts it pays to Australian news businesses, either by arbitrated payments under the News Media Bargaining Code or by commercial deals otherwise recognised under the Administration Bill. To encourage these commercial deals, rather than rely on the default payments under the charge, a platform is able to offset not just the amount they spent, but 150% of the value of deals with larger news businesses and 170% of the value of deals with small or medium news businesses.

In other words, the government is saying to Google, Meta and Tiktok: make commercial deals with news businesses, or we’re going to levy a charge that will cost you a lot more. And we’re going to do this whether or not you carry news. 

For today’s newsletter, the CMT is doing a deep dive into the proposed News Bargaining Incentive. Derek sifts through the draft legislation to identify major issues, before Julie details how funds raised by the new charge might be distributed. As Derek and Julie note, there are currently two consultation processes: Treasury is consulting on the draft legislation; and the Department of Communications is consulting on how funds raised by the charge would be distributed.

From our perspective, of course, it’s not enough for funds to be redistributed to journalism. The funds should be redistributed to public interest journalism. That is, to support quality journalism of the sort recognised this week with the award of the Pulitzer Prizes for Journalism, and of the sort honoured annually by Australia’s Walkley Awards. To round out today’s newsletter, Monica explains some of the tensions behind the scenes at the Walkleys. These tensions appear to be driven by different conceptions of good reporting.

So here’s my suggestion. First, we all get together and agree on the best way to redistribute funds from platforms to news. Second, we agree on which news deserves such funding - and awards. Easy, right?

Read the newsletter:

The News Bargaining Incentive and Walkley walkouts | Issue 6/2026