PIAC recently commented on the consultation on fair revenue sharing between digital platforms and news media. We expressed several concerns regarding the Australian remuneration model for news media, which is one of the options primarily being considered for Canada. We noted several issues with this regime, such as lack of public transparency, how it may particularly hurt smaller news media outlets, and affect key policy issues such as freedom of press and speech. The other regime discussed in the consultation paper is the mandatory financial contributions regime, which would work in a similar way as the regime for contributions to Canadian content. We argued that this will be a better option than the Australian model as it would allow for equitable access to funds, which would be administered through an independent fund. Our position is that it would be best to wait and see how these models pan out in other countries, review any issues that arise and see what lessons could be applied, before implementing a regime here.
PIAC comments on stakeholder engagement on fair revenue sharing between digital platforms and news media
PIAC recently commented on the consultation on fair revenue sharing between digital platforms and news media.
We expressed several concerns regarding the Australian remuneration model for news media, which is one of the options primarily being considered for Canada. The Australian model enables eligible news businesses to bargain individually or collectively with digital platforms over payment for the inclusion of news on the platforms and services, while providing mediation and final offer arbitration to resolve any bargaining issues. We noted several issues with this regime, such as lack of public transparency, how it may particularly hurt smaller news media outlets, and affect key policy issues such as freedom of press and speech.
The other regime discussed in the consultation paper is the mandatory financial contributions regime, which would work in a similar way as the regime for contributions to Canadian content. It would require digital platforms to make financial contributions to the news and information sector, as a percentage of their overall Canadian revenues, to be paid to an independent fund. We argued that this will be a better option than the Australian model as it would allow for equitable access to funds, which would be administered through an independent fund. We suggested that an independent, third party or commissioner(s) should be appointed and given broad administration, oversight and enforcement powers, and in turn, this independent commission be made subject to some form of public oversight.
Our position is that it would be best to wait and see how these models pan out in other countries, review any issues that arise and see what lessons could be applied. Meanwhile, if a model has to be implemented, it should be one that promotes transparency, equity, and sustainability, particularly for smaller news media organizations and other key policy considerations such as freedom of expression, which in our view could be better achieved by a mandatory financial contributions regime than the Australian model.
Read our full submission here