I hope you’re right. It is why I said hopefully it’s not as bad as it sounds.
There is an unfortunate tendency for people to be contacted after hours (& an expectation they’ll respond immediately). Obviously some of that comes with more senior roles, and is to be expected, but it should be minimised.
Reportedly Google will pay Nine more than $30 million per year for 5 years
This is the Junkee deal Frydenburg was referring to:
News Corp has signed a three-year content deal with Google, covering its newspapers in Australia, USA and Britain.
It may be good for Mr. Murdoch, at least as far as the Google deal is concerned. It’s not good for Australians who got most of their news on Facebook, and who may be unlikely to seek it out elsewhere. It’s not good for publishers who benefited from having their content shared on the site, and indeed from sharing it themselves. And neither is it good for smaller publishers on Google who don’t qualify under the law to extract payment from platforms, and whose output may end up subordinate to the already powerful players who can do just that.
The measure seems to get reality backward. Certainly, Facebook and Google’s dual dominance of the digital advertising market helped smash journalism’s business model in the first place. But now that’s done, publishers (including The [Washington] Post) make more money from the traffic and subscriptions they gain through platforms than platforms do from monetizing the material publishers put there. What platforms gain is high-quality content and a healthier information ecosystem. That’s why voluntary agreements in which platforms, for a fee, repackage publishers’ journalism for fuller integration into their product have become increasingly popular.
It hasn’t taken long for the first Facebook deal to be announced:
It’s funny how now that organizations can sell the content to platforms such as face book and Google and it supports journalisms, 10 no longer have any content to selll and monetize as they shut down 10 daily and have 1 bulletin a day.
I’m sure 10 will follow along with SBS and regional companies.
It’s hard to understand when News consumption year after year declines on TV yet increases online, why 10 News is not in the digital space AT ALL
They have 5 large newsrooms employing hundreds of people around the country. Plus outposts in Canberra, LA and I think London.
Yet in 2021 these hundreds of people produce absolutely no content for online, where consumption is exploding, instead putting 100% of resources into a declining and aging platform (FTA)
I’d love to hear the head of 10 news sit in a room with news heads around the world and explain why this is. It would be met with blank stares 
I know it’s a controversial opinion but 10 News First’ position as a healthy, independent provider of news in Australia is to be cemented for the next decade and beyond: they need to get out of the local news bulletin for one hour a day at 5pm model and go national
They need to pivot into a 19 hour a day (4am-10pm) news organization producing content primarily for online consumption and secondary tv consumption from 5am-11pm.
It’s essential to be able to survive
Some people are saying that Facebook did a backflip. They didn’t. The government caved in to Facebook’s demands to change the proposed legislation.
But Facebook have agreed to mediate and broker commercial deals before they are subjected to mandatory arbitration under the proposed media law. They will have to pay media companies so haven’t got their way either.
Caving-in, conceding defeat, sounds like one side just accepted the situation.
That’s not what facebook did.
If anyone caved, it was the Morrison government; they changed the legislation, giving the social media companies months of time before any future enforcement of the code (negotiation time, the arbitration is now the ‘last resort’, and one month notice - to again turn off news content - before enforcement).
The political spin/rhetoric is ridiculous. The proposed legislation was very bad; it’s now less bad, at least for facebook.
The bill for the news media code passed through the House of Representatives today and will now be sent to the Governor-General for signing.
The full name of the bill is Treasury Laws Amendment (News Media and Digital Platforms Mandatory Bargaining Code) Bill 2021.
The Australian Communications and Media Authority (ACMA) today opened applications for Australian news businesses wishing to register for the News Media and Digital Platforms Mandatory Bargaining Code (the code).
The code has been designed to help support the sustainability of public interest journalism in Australia.
To be registered, applicants will have to meet the eligibility requirements set out in the code. The ACMA has published a set of guidelines to help potential applicants determine whether they are eligible to register under the code.
ACMA Chair Nerida O’Loughlin said eligible corporations that operate news businesses could apply via the ACMA website.
“I encourage any news businesses interested in being registered under the code to carefully read through the eligibility guidelines on our website and, if eligible, to apply through our online portal,” Ms O’Loughlin said.
“The ACMA will assess applications and publish details about registered news businesses on its website.”
Registered corporations and their news sources will be published on a register on the ACMA website.
Access the application portal and the ACMA’s guidelines on the ACMA website
@Leo_Puglisi6 Are you going to apply? My reading of the guidelines indicates that you are probably not eligible. But what would I know!