The future of news cannot be built on a broken view of the past
Google’s VP of news, Richard Gingras, argues that our understanding of today’s publishing industry is built upon a fundamental misreading of the past.
At the mid-point of the ACCC’s 18-month inquiry into the impact of technology on Australian media, it’s time to acknowledge that a profitable future for the news industry is attainable if we acknowledge and move beyond the challenges of the past and work together to adapt to the reality of a digital future.
There is cause to be optimistic about the future of news publishing in Australia, but not on the basis that success will be achieved by preserving old business models – it will depend on publishers embracing technology to reach audiences in different ways, and rethink their commercial strategy.
These are critical considerations as Australia’s competition regulator examines the transformative impact of digital platforms on the news and advertising industry and considers what action, if any, should be taken.
Don’t you love the way hucksters assert they are here to “help”?
Google relies, by its nature, on sucking value out of news businesses. That’s its business model.
The future of news will be a model like Netflix. Do we think Netflix is likely soon to open its doors to Google/YouTube? About when hell freezes over.
Domain. Realestate.com.au. Carsguide. Seek… the list goes on and on of digital disruptors that over the past 20 years have stolen all those eye-balls and dollars from Fairfax and News and other newspaper publishers. Oh, that doesn’t fit the narrative does it? Because many of those were established and are still owned by those very publisher groups. The one who should be yelling loudest at Google is the Yellow Pages – how dare you provide a better service without the need for bloody big books of ads.
“Google puts the user first in everything that we do”
So – when a user say’s they do not want to be tracked… but Google tracks them anyway… Google are doing that for the users benefit?
Lets be really clear and simple – Google puts Google and shareholder value First and everything else is SO far down the list its insignificant
Googles mission is to organise the worlds information and make it freely available to the masses.
Many people in the world have woken up and are far more awake than in any other era. FB too have aided this, with their ability to share this information.
There have been coughs and splutters, however it will be interesting what the world look like in 20 years. Without Google and FB we would still be eating out of Murdoch’s bowl. He still wields power, however, fortunately, it is fading.
“Today, news publishers must reframe their value proposition around, well, news. If you’re asking people to pay for content, which many publishers are now doing, it raises the question: what’s the value proposition? Why should a consumer be paying for this? They have to have news that is valuable, which consumers can’t get elsewhere.”
This is correct, and also points out to why the future looks so bleak at the moment. Instead of going the way that *might* work by producing something of value (properly researched and edited content which puts the interest of the audience first), publisher’s are going a direction we are *confident* ends in business failure (unethically produced click-bait/content which puts the interest of owner’s first).
Its very, very hard to feel sympathy for an industry so committed to self-destruction. Why not try the subscription/user first model? Too hard basket?
You’re right. In fact the comment above reflects the problem. People assume news media failed because of online classified. It didn’t.
The core problem is that news media had no focus on readers and value. They still dont in most cases.
Murdoch uses media to bully people and get what he wants. Others have done that before.
Fairfax is run by people who see no value in news. They’ve never really even tried to operate commercially.
The ultimate issue is that the average consumer is not that interested in news, and definitely does not want to pay for it.
I don’t see news surviving beyond free national services such as the BBC and ABC, and politically funded propagandist services such as Fox.
The main problem is that due to the connection of the right wing/big business/money, this means we won’t ever have a balanced situation. We will have “neutral news” and we will have “right wing” news. We’re accelerating towards that reality now.
Hi Richard
You know those evil guys who lobby for gun ownership. Or who work for the sugar industry to ensure we all keep consuming lots of sugars? Or fossil fuels.
Those guys have an amazing way of distorting what they do so they can see their services as good for the world.
Amazing how self- deluded some people can be.