Government shows weakness with media bill advance

Why Paul Goldsmith's "good cop" routine is doomed to fail

UPDATE: FORGIVE ANY TYPOS HERE I HAD A TODDLER UPSET ABOUT HER IMMUNISATIONS JOSTLING ON MY KNEE AS I TYPED.

UPDATE II: Now edited.

When Labour first introduced the Fair Digital News Bargaining Bill, then opposition spokesperson and future broadcasting minister Melissa Lee's speech highlighted many and various issues with the proposed legislation.

The gist of the law is to compel digital platforms like Google and Meta to pay media companies for the news content they allow on their platform.

Lee objected to this as an unwarranted government interference to be implemented despite a lack of concrete evidence of harm caused by digital platforms. She criticised the bill for failing to address the fundamental need for media companies to adapt to the digital age. She also warned that the legislation could have unintended negative consequences, particularly international precedents for this type of law actually hurting media.

Subsequent to this the government changed and Lee became the minister. This was short lived, however, as Warner Brothers Discovery decided they could not continue racking up losses by keeping Newshub on air. Lee’s dispassionate response inspired furty from journalists upset at her lack of action (though it was hard to know what she could have actually done).

Lee was replaced by Paul Goldsmith, who looks set to appease the journalists by announcing the Fair Digital News Bargaining Bill will continue in a modified form. The ACT party has dissented from this and will not support the move. What is striking about all of this is how ACT's press release essentially replicated all of Lee’s concerns.

Per the above the the Fair Digital News Bargaining Bill that is going to now progress is not identical to the Labour proposal. Changes include amendments designed to mirror the Australian digital bargaining code more closely. This may give you the impression that the Australian model has been a success in some way.

In fact, the opposite is true.