Report commissioned by Google says Google isn't to blame for the death of print news
- Reference: 1622831109
- News link: https://www.theregister.co.uk/2021/06/04/independent_report_commissioned_by_google/
- Source link:
The rot set in during the 70s and 80s' and was accelerated by the rise of the internet, which had the unfortunate side effect of winnowing newsrooms, with titles shuttered and [1]countless P45s issued .
The finger of blame has often been pointed at large internet titans like Google, Facebook and Amazon, which hoover up an eye-wateringly large proportion of annual digital ad spending - 64 per cent between them in the US last year, according to [2]eMarketeer .
[3]
Fighting back against those claims, Mountain View has commissioned an "independent study" from professional services firm Accenture, which [4]attributes the decline in print media [PDF] to the rise of online classifieds platforms like eBay, as well as web-based real-estate tools like RightMove and Zoopla.
[5]
[6]
The study (ironically hosted on Amazon's iron) painted a grim picture of the traditional newspaper business. In Western Europe alone, print media revenues fell from €42.6bn in 2003 to €26.5bn 2019. Although every revenue stream experienced some degree of decline, the most precipitous drop was found in the formerly lucrative classifieds ads business, plunging from €9.9bn in the halcyon days of 2003, to just €2.6bn in 2019.
This fall accounts for 44 per cent of the total newspaper revenue decline. It also suggests that legacy publications have struggled to transition to the online classified business, with just €100m generated across every print paper in Western Europe. Instinctively, this makes some sense. Why would you go to your local rag to find overpriced properties to rent, when there are specialist sites instead?
[7]
The report acknowledges that newspapers, and the broader media segment, have experienced a steep decline in advertising revenues independent of the woes experienced in the classified business.
According to the Google commissioned report, between 2003 and 2019, the total advertising spend grew from €32.3bn to €112.2bn. During this period, the shares held by newspapers more than halved, falling to €10.8bn from €32.8bn. Magazines, print directories, and trade publications had a similarly grim time. Radio and television had a slightly better go of it. Although their respective shares of the advertising market contracted, the total spent on each category grew modestly.
During this period, internet advertising revenues exploded from just €2.2bn to €50.5bn. Predictably, search swallowed the largest proportion of this, taking home €18.3bn, with display advertising not far behind at €15.8bn.
[8]
Accenture study attempts to point to the few silver linings surrounding journalism’s threateningly grey cloud. Readership numbers in Western Europe, it noted, increased by 38 per cent during the time period.
What's ahead for news
It also highlighted a greater willingness for the public to pay for news, with the number of paid subscriptions increasing 307 per cent between 2013 and 2018, when it reached 31.5 million.
Although positive — and perhaps necessary — for the news industry, this isn't a good thing for democracy and the public discourse. With more and more high-quality sources of journalism lurking behind paywalls, experts have [9]raised concerns that the remaining free content is largely, for lack of a better word, dross.
It also doesn't bode well for those hoping to access a diversity of opinions and perspectives. Whereas previously you could freely observe the left-right split on an issue by visiting the websites of The Telegraph and The Guardian, now you have to pay, at least in the case of the former.
Google has a vested interest in disputing the narrative that it’s the enemy of journalism. The company was spooked in February when Australia's Parliament passed the landmark [10]News Media Bargaining Code , which requires these companies to share revenue with the publications it links to.
Competition issues
Australia's competition regulator had [11]previously expressed concerns that social and search giants hold a disproportionate share of the country's advertising market. It claimed that for every A$100 spent by advertisers in 2018, A$49 and A$24 went to Google and Facebook respectively.
Google vehemently opposed this bill, even [12]threatening to leave the Aussie market entirely . This later turned out to be an empty threat, with the company agreeing to pay Nine Entertainment and Seven West Media fees worth an estimated A$60m.
Facebook [13]similarly caved , but not before [14]temporarily blocking the sharing of all news media content on the site for Australia-based users.
Nonetheless, Google likely fears legislators in other territories may be tempted to follow the example of Canberra, and launch a crackdown of their own. By reframing the discussion surrounding legacy print media to the issue of classified ads and paywalls, the search behemoth is effectively trying to pass the buck to smaller outfits like Zoopla. ®
Get our [15]Tech Resources
[1] https://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2020/04/20/u-s-newsroom-employment-has-dropped-by-a-quarter-since-2008/
[2] https://www.wsj.com/articles/amazon-surpasses-10-of-u-s-digital-ad-market-share-11617703200
[3] https://pubads.g.doubleclick.net/gampad/jump?co=1&iu=/6978/reg_offbeat/front&sz=300x50%7C300x100%7C300x250%7C300x251%7C300x252%7C300x600%7C300x601&tile=2&c=2YLqifwG4uIbsOpTTclqALwAAAIw&t=ct%3Dns%26unitnum%3D2%26raptor%3Dcondor%26pos%3Dtop%26test%3D0
[4] https://newsmediaanalysis.s3-ap-southeast-2.amazonaws.com/accenture_analysis_WesternEuropeNewsMedia.pdf
[5] https://pubads.g.doubleclick.net/gampad/jump?co=1&iu=/6978/reg_offbeat/front&sz=300x50%7C300x100%7C300x250%7C300x251%7C300x252%7C300x600%7C300x601&tile=4&c=44YLqifwG4uIbsOpTTclqALwAAAIw&t=ct%3Dns%26unitnum%3D4%26raptor%3Dfalcon%26pos%3Dmid%26test%3D0
[6] https://pubads.g.doubleclick.net/gampad/jump?co=1&iu=/6978/reg_offbeat/front&sz=300x50%7C300x100%7C300x250%7C300x251%7C300x252%7C300x600%7C300x601&tile=3&c=33YLqifwG4uIbsOpTTclqALwAAAIw&t=ct%3Dns%26unitnum%3D3%26raptor%3Deagle%26pos%3Dmid%26test%3D0
[7] https://pubads.g.doubleclick.net/gampad/jump?co=1&iu=/6978/reg_offbeat/front&sz=300x50%7C300x100%7C300x250%7C300x251%7C300x252%7C300x600%7C300x601&tile=4&c=44YLqifwG4uIbsOpTTclqALwAAAIw&t=ct%3Dns%26unitnum%3D4%26raptor%3Dfalcon%26pos%3Dmid%26test%3D0
[8] https://pubads.g.doubleclick.net/gampad/jump?co=1&iu=/6978/reg_offbeat/front&sz=300x50%7C300x100%7C300x250%7C300x251%7C300x252%7C300x600%7C300x601&tile=3&c=33YLqifwG4uIbsOpTTclqALwAAAIw&t=ct%3Dns%26unitnum%3D3%26raptor%3Deagle%26pos%3Dmid%26test%3D0
[9] https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/1464884918806733
[10] https://www.accc.gov.au/focus-areas/digital-platforms/draft-news-media-bargaining-code#draft-code-q-amp-as
[11] https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-australia-56163550
[12] https://www.theregister.com/2021/01/22/google_australia_search_threat/
[13] https://www.theregister.com/2021/02/23/facebook_and_australia_do_a_deal/
[14] https://www.theregister.com/2021/02/17/facebook_australian_news/
[15] https://whitepapers.theregister.com/
Funnily, this could happen to Google as well. The problem of the newspapers is that the way they benefit to society — news — is distinct from the way they made their money: ads. Somebody came up that was more efficient at ads, and they lost their source of revenue. We regret this, because society really needs the news, otherwise nobody would mind their passing, same as nobody cares that phone books and yellow pages are gone.
Google also benefits society in a way that is completely distinct from the way they make money. Somebody might well show up who would serve ads even better, and it would be Google's turn to cry for help.
Partly true
Local papers survived on their advertising revenue - a large part of which used to be from housing ads. This part of their income has all but vanished as advertising on Rightmove is far more effective. The classified ads for tradesmen has to a large part been gobbled by Google. Much of the vehicle advertising has moved to Autotrader, manufacturers websites and eBay. Secondhand items are no longer advertised in local papers - eBay is more effective. The bits of advertising that are left (eg sales at local shops) are not enough to sustain anything like the previous range of local papers.
Print media advertising can not compete with internet advertising for speed or number and quality of photos. (Any photos printed on standard newspaper are restricted to poor quality - far worse than quality of photos available on the internet.)
Unfortunately local papers (barring special circumstances eg the Metro in London) are going to die out. (The Metro has a large fairly captive audience in London commuters.)
Re: Partly true
Sales at local shops would be FaceBook I think? I don't know, I never go there.
Have you been to London recently? It is a ghost town. On the Bakerloo Line at Oxford Circus in the morning peak, previously people would have been packed in the carriage armpit to armpit. Now you share the carriage with about 5 other people.
This isn't a new story. The handwriting has been on the wall since the late 90's. And the news biz has done precious little except reluctantly getting online, and having their lunch eaten. Well all know that paywalls suck, especially when ALL the content is there. But maybe a selection of 4-8 stories, in an abbreviated form can be accessed? Perhaps the ones the various media outlets promote on social media. Why? It looks like a fair compromise and a 'meeting in the middle'. The rest can be paywalled if one enters from any other place other than a social media channel. Just a thought.
News Media Bargaining Code
This will be the interesting one to watch, especially after the threats from G and FB came to very little.
I wonder which countries will be next in having a backbone and stand up to them.
I fully expect the UK government to be at the bottom of that list.
Lots of reasons to drop the newspaper subsciption
True story. We subscribed to the local newspaper for the local news. Then, about 15 years ago, they switched to a tabloid format -- presumably to save money on newsprint. Unfortunately, the dogs couldn't adjust to the new smaller page format and sometimes pooped next to the newspaper. We got tired of cleaning up after them, dropped the newspaper subscription and used the money to buy puppy pads which are quite a lot bigger than newspapers.
Chalk it up to failure to understand customer needs.
First they lost classified ads
And that took them from profitable to neutral. Then they lost readership, as people who subscribed more for "news" in general than local news could get that news from other sources.
I used to skim through a couple local papers when I was living with my parents, when I grew up and moved out on my own I didn't think it was worth it for something I only spent about 20-30 minutes a day looking at. I watched network news, CNN and later the internet, and didn't really miss local news, though now I have an app from the local paper I spend about a couple minutes a day looking at to see if anything is happening in my city/state I should care about.
I wouldn't put all the blame on Google, but they certainly haven't helped.
Report commissioned by Google
. . is in favor of Google.
Wow, that's astonishing. Must be totally unbiased and truthful.
Honestly, I would like to be a fly on the wall in the kind of meeting where a multinational behemoth comes with a suitcase full money and states what report it wants and what results it wants.
I'd really like to see the face of those so-called "journalists" eyeing the money and saying "sure, we can do that".
Just to see hypocrisy in the flesh.
Once, just once, I would like to see a report commissioned by somebody that did not conclude in favor of that someone. As it is, these days, every time you hear of a report with favorable conclusions for something, all you need to do is ask "which entity commissioned that report ?" to know why.
The whole system is despicable.