In a research report published earlier this year, a National Taiwan University academic issued a “wake-up call” about the state of the news media’s dwindling revenues. Without traditional advertising income, newspapers have been forced to cut staff and quality, endangering the esteemed fourth estate essential to a functioning democracy.
Graduate Institute of Journalism professor Lin Chao-chen (林照真) laid the blame squarely at the feet of technology giants — particularly Google and Facebook — which use newspaper content to bring more eyeballs to their own ads without paying a penny toward the salaries of journalists or editors.
In her estimation, 60 percent of staff losses at Taiwan’s three largest newspapers — the Liberty Times (the Taipei Times’ sister newspaper), the United Daily News and the China Times — could be directly traced to the monopolization of online advertising by Google and Facebook.
She came to this conclusion by following the money, finding that advertising in the three papers totaled NT$11 billion (US$369.8 million at the current exchange rate) in 1996, compared with only NT$1.1 billion in 2020. By contrast, 2020 saw NT$48.26 billion of online media ad volume, creating what Lin called an “avalanche of losses” for newspapers.
Over the same period, the number of reporters and editorial staff at the papers dropped by 62 percent, along with their sizes and variety of coverage. Although the papers’ Web sites generate billions of views, up to 58 percent is redirected through Google or Facebook, while online ads sell for a pittance compared with print ads.
The issue is by no means unique to Taiwan, as traditional news media around the world have struggled amid the new landscape. News remuneration legislation is favored by many governments, starting with the European Copyright Directive passed by the EU in 2019, requiring platforms to pay publishers for content aggregated on their sites. Australia last year followed with its News Media Bargaining Code, while similar bills are making their way through the Canadian parliament and the US Congress. Google especially has complied with the rules wherever necessary, signing deals with hundreds of media companies to pay for rights to display their news content.
Lin in her report called for similar legislation in Taiwan, saying that Taiwanese society must intervene on its own behalf to protect an invaluable market for information and free speech.
While there are legal options, they must be considered with care, and implemented alongside other changes. As with the debate over Uber’s encroachment on the taxi business, the conflict cannot be solved in one legislative swoop.
First and foremost, mandating profit sharing poses the risk of entrenching large players on both sides. Alphabet and Meta could choose which publishers they sign deals with, leaving smaller players to fend for themselves. Canada, for example, is looking to rectify this by allowing smaller outlets to negotiate collectively. On the other hand, it could also become impossible for smaller online platforms to compete with the giants, as they might not have the same resources at their disposal to implement automatic copyright flagging and pay for all the content displayed on their sites.
At the same time, publishers themselves must adapt. They should take the initiative to negotiate and open up channels of communication with tech platforms, while also experimenting with new business models to minimize exposure to revenue streams that have run dry.
A free and open society requires that its people be well informed, which is only possible through robust news media. It is only fair that tech giants share their spoils, which hopefully would be the first step toward reinvigorating a stagnant industry.
Saudi Arabian largesse is flooding Egypt’s cultural scene, but the reception is mixed. Some welcome new “cooperation” between two regional powerhouses, while others fear a hostile takeover by Riyadh. In Cairo, historically the cultural capital of the Arab world, Egyptian Minister of Culture Nevine al-Kilany recently hosted Saudi Arabian General Entertainment Authority chairman Turki al-Sheikh. The deep-pocketed al-Sheikh has emerged as a Medici-like patron for Egypt’s cultural elite, courted by Cairo’s top talent to produce a slew of forthcoming films. A new three-way agreement between al-Sheikh, Kilany and United Media Services — a multi-media conglomerate linked to state intelligence that owns much of
The US and other countries should take concrete steps to confront the threats from Beijing to avoid war, US Representative Mario Diaz-Balart said in an interview with Voice of America on March 13. The US should use “every diplomatic economic tool at our disposal to treat China as what it is... to avoid war,” Diaz-Balart said. Giving an example of what the US could do, he said that it has to be more aggressive in its military sales to Taiwan. Actions by cross-party US lawmakers in the past few years such as meeting with Taiwanese officials in Washington and Taipei, and
Denmark’s “one China” policy more and more resembles Beijing’s “one China” principle. At least, this is how things appear. In recent interactions with the Danish state, such as applying for residency permits, a Taiwanese’s nationality would be listed as “China.” That designation occurs for a Taiwanese student coming to Denmark or a Danish citizen arriving in Denmark with, for example, their Taiwanese partner. Details of this were published on Sunday in an article in the Danish daily Berlingske written by Alexander Sjoberg and Tobias Reinwald. The pretext for this new practice is that Denmark does not recognize Taiwan as a state under
The Republic of China (ROC) on Taiwan has no official diplomatic allies in the EU. With the exception of the Vatican, it has no official allies in Europe at all. This does not prevent the ROC — Taiwan — from having close relations with EU member states and other European countries. The exact nature of the relationship does bear revisiting, if only to clarify what is a very complicated and sensitive idea, the details of which leave considerable room for misunderstanding, misrepresentation and disagreement. Only this week, President Tsai Ing-wen (蔡英文) received members of the European Parliament’s Delegation for Relations