Google's $250M Deal with California to Fund Newsrooms May Be Stalled (politico.com)
- Reference: 0180505475
- News link: https://tech.slashdot.org/story/26/01/03/0351247/googles-250m-deal-with-california-to-fund-newsrooms-may-be-stalled
- Source link: https://www.politico.com/news/2026/01/01/california-google-deal-dolly-parton-politics-00708332?cid=apn
"A year after it was cemented — and billed as a model that could succeed where entire countries and continents had fallen short — the agreement is tangled in budget cuts, bureaucratic infighting and unresolved questions about who controls the money," [2]reports Politico , "leaving journalists empty-handed and casting doubt on whether the lofty experiment will ever live up to its promise."
> The program, initially framed as a nearly $250 million commitment over five years, has secured just $20 million in new money for journalists in its first year, with no guarantee the funding will continue. It's changed hands twice since the University of California, Berkeley withdrew its support [with school officials " [3]worried they wouldn't have enough of a say in how the money was distributed"]. Suggestions that other big tech players like ChatGPT-maker OpenAI could front more resources haven't materialized. A $62.5 million "AI accelerator" tied to the deal hasn't been set up yet.
>
> Not a single newsroom has seen a dollar of funding, and there's no definitive timeline spelling out when they will... [The article adds later that state officials "have yet to draft precise rules for how California will decide which newsrooms get cash..."] Conversations with at least 20 people involved in the deal's rollout reveal how California's budget shortfalls and intraparty spats among Democrats scrambled it... California's struggle to launch its program has dampened hopes of replicating its model in other states such as Oregon, Illinois and New York, where lawmakers have tried but failed to make Big Tech pay for news...
>
> When [California governor] Newsom unveiled his final state budget plan in May 2025 after a [4]$12 billion deficit suddenly scrambled the state's finances, California's first-year commitment was reduced from $30 million to $10 million. Google followed suit within days and cut its first-year contribution from $15 million to $10 million... Whether the program even continues past 2026 is also unclear. Newsom's office declined to confirm whether the state will provide its $10 million commitment to the fund in the coming 2026-27 state budget. Newsom will also be termed out in 2027, and there's no requirement for his successor to honor the state's agreement with Google.
[1] https://www.politico.com/news/2024/08/21/google-california-newsroom-ai-00174817
[2] https://www.politico.com/news/2026/01/01/california-google-deal-dolly-parton-politics-00708332?cid=apn
[3] https://www.politico.com/news/2025/01/16/california-google-journalism-uc-berkeley-00198605
[4] https://www.politico.com/news/2025/05/14/newsom-unveils-plan-close-billion-budget-hole-00349006
Dying... (Score:2)
Traditional news sources (local tv stations and newspapers) are trying to reimagine themselves, their future audience has moved to screens, and podcasts have replaced long format journalism. With google's present focus on AI, dollars are going to other projects. California is in budget crunch and this is likely to get worse. Little chance that this will be successful, although many in government (both sides) would like to own a captive press.
Ah, my lovely state of California (Score:5, Insightful)
Where nobody cares about whether a problem is actually solved. Only about who gets control of the millions of dollars allocated towards solving it.
And actually, it's better if the problem *isn't* solved. Because then we clearly need more money.
Re: (Score:2)
> And actually, it's better if the problem *isn't* solved. Because then we clearly need more money.
Bingo. Buying votes is expensive.
The only way anyone could be surprised by this is if they've been in a coma for the last 30 years.
Have they tried selling subscriptions? (Score:1)
Maybe this is a dumb question, but have the newspapers in California tried selling subscriptions to their readers?
I mean I'm sure they have tons of readers who really want to read their texts. I'm sure they'd be happy to pay for it, if only the newspapers would think to ask them for it.
Re: (Score:2)
> Maybe this is a dumb question, but have the newspapers
I want to point out that for the most part, there are no more newspapers, they are opinion papers. A bare, usually not well investigated set of facts (mostly a press release, unverified) followed by an entire banquet of opinion laid out on a smorgasbord of right wing memes or left wing wishful thinking, leaving "analysis" down to the basic divide of who is on first, what is on second, and I don't know is third base, leaving us to the unenviable occupant of short stop.
While most of the USA's opinion is forme
Re: (Score:2)
Everyone looks at big breasts, whether they be real, artificial (on the inside) or curved padding on the outside.
Re: (Score:2)
Because incels on Twitter have never seen real ones?