Skip to content

Search Results for: Media bargaining

Search again:

Australia’s News Media Bargaining Code and the World It Created

If publishers bargaining for payments from platforms was going to save local journalism in Australia, we’d probably know it by now. After all, back in 2021 Australia passed the News Media Bargaining Code, presented as a way for publishers to claw back advertising revenue. In their eyes, their articles, photos, columns, editorials, and letters to…

Read More

Australia’s News Media Bargaining Code: A New Institutional Perspective

In 2021, the Australian Federal Government passed a landmark News Media and Digital Platforms Mandatory Bargaining Code through both houses of parliament, which requires the platform companies Google and Meta (then Facebook) to contribute financially to the production of news content by Australian news publishers. This measure, which is estimated to involve an annual transfer…

Read More

Small Media, Big Tech, and the “Partiality” Imperative

It has been about two years since Australia enacted its much-disputed News Media Bargaining Code (NMBC) legislation. That new dispensation Down Under requires hegemonic Big Tech platforms to remunerate local Aussie media outlets, in straightforward enough fashion, for the right to post and disseminate an outlet’s substantive content on a technology platform. The motivating idea…

Read More

Making—and Sustaining—the News: A Virtual Discussion

The question of how to fund newsgathering has made the news. With the advent of internet classifieds, the growth of massive search and social media platforms, and the wide availability of free news content, media organizations—particularly local and regional ones—have faced challenges in sustaining robust newsgathering operations. Since 2005, 2,500 newspapers, or more than a quarter…

Read More

Making—and Sustaining—the News

The question of how to fund newsgathering has made the news. Since the advent of internet classifieds, the growth of massive search and social media platforms, and the wide availability of free news content, media organizations—particularly local and regional ones—have faced challenges in sustaining robust newsgathering operations. Since 2005, 2,500 newspapers, or more than a…

Read More

Should We Save Newspapers from Google?

There are a lot of discussions about the media in American politics, but very few about advertising, which is the key pivot point around which the media organizes itself. In America, and throughout the world, the press is dying, starved of ad revenue. Since 2005, we’ve lost more than 2,500 newspapers and tens of thousands…

Read More

Big Tech and the News: A Problem of Countervailing Power

On the morning of October 14, 2020, I caught a firsthand glimpse of what it’s like for a traditional media outlet to go up against the vast agglomeration of economic and digital power known as Big Tech—and to do so without the benefit of what economist John Kenneth Galbraith defined as countervailing power. That was…

Read More

David Lilienthal: The Man Who Managed the American Century

Today, a growing number of voices call for a new American consensus that looks more like the corporatist world of the New Deal and post–World War II decades. If our present ambitions are to be modeled off this bygone era, however, then it would behoove us to investigate the lives and legacies of the men who made it so. David E. Lilienthal was one of them, and he embodies the New Deal era’s greatest successes and aspirations as well as its most troubling failures and missteps…

Read More

The Tenuous Place of Big Philanthropy in America’s Social Contract

The power of big corporations and other large private interests has attracted more attention from within a conservatism that’s refining or redefining itself, occasionally contentiously. For example, Compact magazine cofounder and editor Sohrab Ahmari explores private tyranny and countervailing power in his new book Tyranny, Inc.: How Private Power Crushed American Liberty—and What to Do…

Read More

The Madness of Leaders

“Dictators are easy to read. Democratic leaders are more difficult to decipher. However, they can be just as unbalanced as dicta­tors and can play a truly destructive role in our history.” So Patrick Weil writes in the final paragraph of his thought-provoking treatment of Woodrow Wilson as the “madman in the White House.” His case is built on the seemingly irrational obstinacy—“no compromise or conces­sion of any kind,” Wilson vowed—that resulted in the U.S. Senate’s rejection…

Read More
Sorry, PDF downloads are available
to subscribers only.

Subscribe

Already subscribed?
Sign In With Your AAJ Account | Sign In with Blink