Internet law that provides for remunerating journalism is voted – 04/18/2023 – Market

Bill 2630, which should be voted on in the House in the last week of April, provides for remuneration for journalistic content by internet platforms along the lines of the News Media Bargaining Code adopted in Australia in 2021, according to the report. Sheet. The text of the bill, reported by Deputy Orlando Silva (PCdoB-SP), establishes that journalistic companies will negotiate directly with big techs the payment for the content and, if they do not reach an agreement, there will be arbitration.

Financing journalism was a demand of sector entities such as Abert, Aner and ANJ, which represent the main media outlets, such as Globo and Sheetand wanted the inclusion of the Australian model in PL 2630, the fake news bill, a priority for the Executive.

Australia was a pioneer with its code, which came into force in March 2021. The model determines that vehicles negotiate individually or collectively (to increase bargaining power) with platforms the payment for journalistic content. If they cannot reach an agreement, arbitration is envisaged.

The model is an attempt to solve the professional press business model crisis, mainly caused by the hegemony of big techs in the advertising market. The premise is that internet platforms gain relevance and profit by displaying journalistic content without paying anything for it and should share the result with media companies.

Canada, Indonesia and New Zealand are also discussing the adoption of bargaining codes. In Canada, an Australian-inspired bill was introduced in April 2022 and is expected to be voted on in parliament this spring. It is expected to generate US$ 245 million (R$ 1.2 billion) annually for media companies.

Platforms oppose the bargaining code. When it was adopted in Australia, Facebook even blocked sharing news on the platform for a week, and then backtracked. Google had threatened to wipe out the search engine in the Australian market if the law took effect, but it has not followed through.

Smaller publishers are also critical of the model, saying the biggest beneficiaries of the bargaining code would be media conglomerates.

One of the platforms’ criticisms of the bargaining model is that big tech resources will end up funding disinformation sites. The debate about who can be considered a journalist and, therefore, should receive resources is complex.

PL 2630 establishes that companies will be able to negotiate with platforms for two years from the publication of the law, that produce journalistic content on a regular, organized and professional basis, and that maintain a physical address and responsible editor in Brazil.

In Australia, an independent body, the Communications and Media Authority, decides who can negotiate – vehicles need to have annual revenue of at least US$ 150 thousand Australian dollars (US$ 100 thousand, R$ 494.1 thousand), have to follow professional editorial standards and have editorial independence.

In Canada, they must be classified as news outlets for tax purposes, employ at least two journalists and produce content focused on “general interest”.

None of this would prevent openly ideological vehicles, disseminators of disinformation or sensationalists from negotiating and receiving resources from the platforms.

However, this is a problem that also applies to a possible funding fund for journalism, a model defended by smaller media and big tech.

In any case, platforms already finance vehicles of this type. One of the Google News Initiative fund recipients was Jovem Pan News. As reported by the SheetGoogle Ads monetizes countless websites that spread misinformation related to Covid or the electoral process.

The text that should go to the vote in the last week of April also determines that Cade (Administrative Council for Economic Defense) must act against internet platforms that abuse economic power and market concentration in their negotiations with media companies.