News code money went to shareholders or debt: Former Nine boss
The majority of money from the News Media Bargaining Code went to the shareholders of Australia’s biggest media companies or was used to pay off their debts, according to the former publisher of Nine, Chris Janz.
Janz, now the CEO of independent business publisher Capital Brief, made the comments on ABC’s Medialand.
Although Janz was vociferous in his support for the Code back when he was chief digital and publishing officer of Nine in 2021, he said the effect of the payments from Google and Meta had been to benefit “the big end of town”.
Chris Janz
“ Media policy in this country has for many years really entrenched incumbency and concentration. You go back to the media ownership law changes that allowed the Nine-Fairfax merger, through to the News Media Bargaining Code, the majority of which benefited the shareholders of three large companies.
“This was because Google and Facebook were encouraged to do deals with effectively the big end of town. The bulk of the cash flowed to the big end of town. I was running one of those at the time. It was fantastic … the reality is, though, the money flowed to shareholders or flowed to retire debt.
“It wasn’t guaranteed to be spent on the journalism. It was just used to increase the profit and very little flowed to new entrants.”
Janz said that a rebate on jobs would work better to support journalism and new entrants.
“There needs to be a view towards policies that encourage investment in new journalism jobs rather than policies that encourage cash going into the coffers of large media companies,” he said.
”There are many forms that could take: one could be a rebate for direct investment in journalism and new journalism jobs that stimulates the industry. Another could be settings that encourage new entrants to come and play.”
Janz said that recent meetings between communications minister Anika Wells and media bosses highlighted how a certain group of incumbents were favoured. He said only the chiefs of News Corp, Nine, Seven, the ABC and the Guardian were invited.
“The largest regional publisher [Australian Community Media] wasn’t invited. There are a host of digital entrants that are investing substantial money in journalism and new models that weren’t invited.”
“If we continue to see media policy through the frame of entrenching incumbency, we really risk having a future landscape of just a few commercial players employing fewer and fewer journalists. I think that’s the wrong answer.”
Janz was the managing director of metro publishing at Fairfax when that organisation was merged with Nine in 2018. He testified in support of the News Media Bargaining Code in front of a Senate inquiry in 2021 as Nine’s publisher.
The Code has never been actively used, instead serving as a threat to induce Meta and Google to strike deals with media companies to use their news content. While these deals remain private – and as Janz pointed out, there is no requirement to spend the proceeds on journalism – they have been estimated to be worth at least $600m in total. Meta walked away from its deals last year, and Google has reportedly reduced the value of some of its deals with small publishers.
This is common knowledge in publishing circles, Google and Facebook get reamed for their objections and obfuscation of their responsibilities, but it’s hard to be serious about enforcement and attribution when the money, earmarked for the improvement of journalism, standards and innovation, is used to pay down debt and prop up market outcomes. Media, Publishing and Journalism are in new eras of disruption (sorry, overused I know) where investment is sorely needed (Let alone the regional areas who are desperate for help) but agendas, misinformation, and an incredible lack of understanding of how new technologies work, hijack funds due to lobbying and market power. The amount of opportunity Australia has lost, building new, vibrant and economically sustainable media platforms is incredible. These tech behemoths have staggering tech knowledge, systems, experience and talent that could have been drawn on to help all Australian media businesses develop in an ever-changing world as part of this code, but no, it was just cash grabs for five or so players. If cash is the desired outcome, why not just tax them properly like every other overseas business?
User ID not verified.
He’s absolutely right – a few token appointments, kick the money to shareholders and then as soon as Facebook gets out they use it as a large part of the excuse to cut ~100 jobs at Nine publishing, mostly journalists.
There are other news organisations away the incumbents that offer more independent and trustworthy news than Nine or News Corp, like Crikey, Capital Brief, or The Guardian. Not owned by billionaires or answerable to shareholders. Australian Community Media prioritises regional readers when no one else bothers in Australia.
All of these organisations are more worthy of your money than Nine or News. And at least News don’t plaster empty statements about their independence all over their websites.
User ID not verified.
Have your say