This weekend brought a lot of heated bluster from old media (and its political representatives) about Google’s supposed threat to democracy.
In Senate hearings on Friday, Google Australia head Mel Silva confirmed the company would pull the search engine from Australia if the federal government hurried ahead with its mandatory news bargaining code as currently drafted. This confirmed Crikey’s report the week earlier: the code, as is, means no Google search.
It gave Scott Morrison a Howard moment — “we’ll decide who searches Australia and the manner in which they search!” — as he huffed, “we don’t respond to threats”. (This will surely be news to anyone who follows the LNP-News Corp relationship.)
Put a fork in them, the election is almost done.
Understand what happens next with our best ever discounts.
Morrison was wrong as a matter of law. The Australian Parliament is constrained by the Howard-era Australia-US free trade agreement, and the US trade representative last week raised concerns that the code may breach the agreement.
This allowed tech reform campaigners to highlight the demonstration of big tech’s raw power, even at risk of an “enemy of my enemy is my friend” embrace of News Corp. Meanwhile, people on social media canvassed alternatives from the not-for-profit search engine DuckDuckGo to Microsoft’s Bing to a VPN (virtual private network) to access Google offshore. Australia would no doubt adapt in some way.
On the way through, however, a Google-less Australian internet threatens a crisis for small businesses which rely on a hyper-local market (that is, most of them). In Australia, as in most of the world, among the most common words at the end of any search are “near me”.
A December report (funded by Google) on the search engine’s economic impact on Australia concluded that the company provided $39 billion of value to Australian businesses, 60% of it to small and medium businesses.
As the Mandy Rice-Davies heuristic goes: they would say that, wouldn’t they?
Still, search and social media distribution has inarguably provided greater and cheaper advertising opportunities for small businesses — from keywords in general search to Google’s geographical interfaces Maps and Waze. As we mourn the loss of local newspapers, Google and Facebook have given these businesses the ability to micro-target new and existing customers.
Thousands of local businesses have shaped their offering and their branding around the opportunities they’re offered. There will be transition costs if they’re now forced to change (for lesser alternatives) and, coming in the midst of the pandemic, it will tip more than a few businesses over the edge.
This is a reminder that there are no good guys in the big tech v old media fight. When the elephants butt heads, the ants get trampled.
Here’s the key: the fight is not about whether the big platforms will pay for journalism. That’s agreed. It’s more about how much they pay and what they pay for.
Google is offering to pay for articles that are published in its editorially curated News Showcase which leans towards journalistic quality, small media and sits outside paywalls. That’s the deal it reached with French publishers, most German publishers (other than the Murdoch-lite Springer group) and Reuters.
News Corp (in particular) wants payment for links and snippets in the search results. Algorithmically this leans towards mass media and outrage clickbait. It would also respect paywalls.
Why does Google care? It says that paying for links shatters its business model which leverages the open web, commercialising all online interactions. That’s what it (and web creator Tim Berners-Lee in his own Senate submission) mean when it says it “undermines the basic principles of the internet”. It concludes it will worsen all the tracking and surveillance that the platform advertising duopoly of Google and Facebook has brought to the web.
Why does News Corp care? Before Christmas, its New York CEO Robert Thomson confirmed an earlier Crikey report that it was close to a global deal with Google, to match its late 2019 deal with Facebook. Now that seems to have gone cold and Google is ramping up its opposition.
Perhaps the Google price of cancelling Australia’s mandatory code was too steep. Perhaps Google fears that, especially in the US right now, there’s a reputation risk in reaching a “news” related deal with News Corp.
What do you think a Google-less Australia would look like? Let us know your thoughts by writing to letters@crikey.com.au. Please include your full name to be considered for publication in Crikey’s Your Say column.
SALE ENDS MIDNIGHT
Expect more from your journalism.
Crikey is an independent Australian-owned and run outfit. It doesn’t enjoy the vast resources of the country’s main media organisations. We take seriously our responsibility to bear witness.
I hope you appreciate our reporting and consider supporting Crikey’s work. Join now for your chance at election themed merch.
Editor-in-chief
Leave a comment
I am not sure that Google shutting down would really have that much influence on small business. If people are searching for goods and services “near me”, they will almost certainly access them with or without Google. There are many sites competing to provide details of local businesses as well as numerous other sources of information. Then there is the huge potential benefit for the wider community of not having them serve up large doses of bullshit and misinformation. I rarely (quite possibly previously never) agree with Scott Morrison but, probably for all the wrong reasons, he is right this time.
I suspect you are overlooking the millions (yes – in Australia) who by almost reflex action call on google for a search. Many will find an alternate but I believe many more wont bother. Scotto hasn’t improved on his kneejerk crap comments. The “search for origin of Covid-19” brain snap has possibly set us back so far that we don’t recover properly prior to climate ending humanity. I wish I was joking but I’m not.
Sure they’ll just use the search engine that they won’t be able to access, or something.
“If people are searching for goods and services “near me”, they will almost certainly access them with or without Google. “
You’d think so, but it doesn’t work that way. I gave up on Google many moons ago, but I still type “near me” out of habit. It doesn’t work. I get results from all over Australia, but rarely for places near me. I don’t know why. I’ve used DuckDuckGo and currently use Ecosia and get the same result.
It’s not insurmountable- I’m learning to specify my suburb and state- but my carefree “near me” days are over.
With ‘location’ turned on it is functional in terms of my travels, internationally, but I haven’t lived in Oz for some time so I can’t say for there.
I didn’t even know that was a thing and just typed my city name when I wanted something.
And if this is a big enough deal, does anyone think that only google can make that work?
Thanks for the mention of Ecosia – I gave it a try and it performed well.
I was disappointed last year when this issue was first raised and someone here recommended DuckDuck which showed hard porn with the slimmest of link to the query – something that google has never done.
I never ask for near me, and I never have my location turned on. What are you people doing. Type in “massage, – Sydney” and don’t give away your location.
Noobs!!!!!!!!
Not a bad service when travelling DB. As for tracking has anyone used the Cloud?
Anyone remember Packer’s disastrous Pink Pages attempt to break the Yellow Pages monopoly of “let your fingers do the walking“?
Admittedly that was prehistoric times before the intertoob when such dinosaurs still roamed the land.
Businesses who bother to do SEO search engine optimisation will be visible locally, nationally and globally in whatever language they choose to have their website and related social media.
What you are describing reflects local businesses not optimising their web presence to be found in organic Google search, or simply lacking any innovation.
A
OK. Let Google and friends go. No doubt an Australian alternative work-around will emerge. It is a bit early in the history of the internet to conclude that it is set in stone and unable to be changed!
This could create a market for… print advertising! Supporting journalists!
Unlikely.
That would require effort, energy, an enquiring mind and, wot’s the word, guts.
Not recognised attributes of the species found in this country since well before the end of the last century.
Aw c’mon Agni cheer up! Get up and go!
And what if that Australian workaround was owned by a consortium of News and Nine/
I agree DL. We actually have Yellow Pages online which searches for businesses in any area you like. And I bet there is a lot less data tracking
IT history is more or less on your side but the fearful remain unconvinced. Yet some venture capital will be required.
This could be a breakthrough for Labor. There’s going to be a lot of annoyed people when they can’t find their favourite shop or recipe.
They say science underpins the post scarcity 24/7 consumer society .My money wagers that shopping underpins it..
I suppose you’re joking. Just as Labor always cops the blame for any economic troubles despite the Coalition’s shocking record and incompetence, any difficulties arising from Google’s disappearance will be Labor’s fault entirely.
Probably right if they support the legislation. Their choice.
And they will support it – there isn’t an anti liberty idiocy put forward by the tories since 2013 (or 1996 under bumbler Beezleblubber) that they have not waved through.
A good opporutnity for promoting digital and critical literacies amongst not just school age, but adults especially.
Yeah,they might find that they have to interact with those bipedal mammals often seen on the street.
If this Federal Liberal Government pushes ahead with their attack on Facebook and Google it is effectively an attack on free speech via personal comments and links to news on these sites. The PM has said “we don’t respond to threats”, sorry PM, you will be judged on this at the polls.
We voters are sick and tired of the propaganda you pedal via the commercial media.
Morrison might not respond to threats but he’s not afraid of dishing them out eg Christine Holgate, the ABC, the funding of ANAO, the refusal to implement an ICAC, etc.
Free speech, blah blah, free speech. If we don’t complete comply with the world’s greatest monopolies it’s an attack on free speech.
Is that your argument? How did this get upvotes?
At the risk of either increasing Wayne’s up-votes or attracting down-votes I believe the assertion to be that the electorate is so rusted to anything Goggle has the risk of loss of enjoyment will surfice to bring down the government.
I think the fellow intends ‘free to choose’ rather that speech.
I’ve given you a down-vote just to ensure your score stays up.
I could not ask for a more appropriate Oz Day gesture.
Once again, I am disappointed at the absence of comprehension of the principal issues but please do not take the criticism personally because some knowledge of the original ARPANET (look it up) is required to locate a context for the objections by Google, Berners-Lee
and others. Let’s ease up on the FUD too eh?
The net was never envisaged as an on-line marketing or sales (not the same) device. Yet, because money talks, that is what we have today; if we discount or subtract the substantial volume of porn; “real” science (as opposed to junk science) being a very small percentage of the whole – and contrary to the original intentions.
The OTHER component that is lurking in the background, which you more or less ignored (a phobia of getting into bed with NewsCorp doesn’t address it), is that the objection is also directed at the Murdoch model of paid news for which Murdoch has an obsession. There are copious additional issues here from the means by which subscriptions are advertised to baiting techniques and none have been examined by the article.
What you failed utterly to identify *is* the option of Australia developing its own “goodle”; call it the wombat (a good burrower with sharp claws) or whatever. By way of an illustration, the PRC has EVERYTHING that a resident in the USA has by way of social media, chat groups, web (e.g. Baidu – a major communications company); the list goes on! It isn’t actually a big deal!
Do you honestly believe that this government could develop any IT application at all? Everything they, especially Stuart Robert, turn their attention (limited though that is) to turns to ashes. This is just another huffing and puffing distraction by this appalling government and once the US pulls them up they will go to water. Or I guess we could ask the PRC for help!
why would you expect that what passes for government in the wide brown land would need to develop a local search engine? There are plenty of smart CS/IT folk here that could do it…
News and Nine are most likely already developing their replacement model, hoping for a near monopoly integrated into their print publications.
Like the Aussie COVID app.
Ha does anyone remember that?! Vanished without a trace! 😀
Alfred,
I remember using a local “finder” in China for product manufacturers, Now if we hooked into the PRC system we could cut out the middle man.
Maybe the PRC would think we are part of China and build some infrastructure like a HS rail network and highways throughout Aus. LOL
The options available are legion Maroochy. All that is required is a trade and diplomatic corp with half a clue.
Who mentioned the government Alfred?Somewhat less than an attempt at humor, the project could be undertaken by the PRC.
Innovation should be cultivated domestically with appropriate research encouragement. Yet, agreed, we could forget government assistance except by interference.
When there is a global system that works as well as GOOGLE why would you waste our pathetically small resource on world scale trying to better it?
Answer : for a good many ideological and ‘security’ reasons to say nothing of independence. However, this event is clear muscle flex. If I have to choose my money will be on the giant.
For the same reason that we should have a manufacturing base?
You are confusing the industries I am afraid. Manufacturing is secondary and requires, in the main, access to cheap labour. It is also becoming very mechanised. Computers etc sit in the ‘tertiary’ sphere. For any first world country the tertiary sphere dominates. Times change over half a century.
When, not if with the Forever War party back in DC, the balloon goes up, ‘rude mechanicals‘ might find their skills in demand.
Alfred I think Erasmus is totally out of touch with the global adoption of GOOGLE with which Australians have participated as well as any. This just another total misjudgment by arguably most dangerous to national future PM in our history.
Trying to be positive, an attempt by our government to develop a national internet search engine would hand Rob Sitch more material than he could use in a dozen episodes of Utopia.
Looking at Australians today Yobbo Search would take off like a rocket.
If one could cope with Yahoo news!
Not too sure about that, an enquiring mind is not a known attribute of yer av’rage oik.