spinofflive
Illustration: Toby Morris
Illustration: Toby Morris

OPINIONMediaAugust 30, 2022

A major new Google product launched in NZ last week. Why haven’t you heard of it?

Illustration: Toby Morris
Illustration: Toby Morris

The launch of Google News Showcase was an oddly quiet affair. That’s because it has a very specific audience, and his name is Willie Jackson, argues The Spinoff’s publisher Duncan Greive.

Google News Showcase, a new product from one of the world’s largest companies, launched in Aotearoa last week. Its arrival felt somewhat muted, limited to a smattering of low-prominence news stories. Finding it is an effort – it’s the the fourth-ranked option in its news sidebar. In a blog post accompanying the announcement, Google said News Showcase exists to “continue our support of New Zealand’s vibrant and diverse news industry to help people find quality journalism and contribute to the sustainability of news organisations”.

Showcase is an aggregation of news from publishers who have signed participation deals with Google, a tacit recognition that Google search, particularly its ubiquitous snippets product, have for years taken the hard and costly work of news organisations and displayed it on Google pages without compensation to support the creation of that journalism. It’s intended to create a sense that Google is now a solid and public-spirited ally to the news industry – at the very least, it would really like broadcasting minister Willie Jackson to think so. He’s the man deciding whether or not to introduce an Australian-style news bargaining code here, and News Showcase is Google’s attempt to say there’s no need.

Google News Showcase for New Zealand (Screengrab)

So far though, it appears that Google’s desire to create fair deals for news media in the region only extended as far as Australia. That country’s news organisations have negotiated deals with Google and Meta worth more than AU$200m per year – enough to create thousands of new jobs in and around journalism, and allow small and large news organisations alike to transition from print to digital with much of their remaining workforce intact. The 2021 deals were clearly affordable for the tech giants, as each continues to operate as before in Australia, and even after market dips, both remain among the 10 largest businesses in the world by market capitalisation.

Adjusting for population and exchange rate, this would imply similar deals with New Zealand’s media would combine for close to $50m per year. While cast-iron NDAs mean we don’t know the precise scale of existing local contracts, analysts pegged Herald publisher NZME’s at around $3.5m. Sources within the Australian media suggest that would be around a quarter of the size it might have been had it been on the same terms as those in Australia.

Other publishers within News Showcase have much less power than NZME – including the likes of Newsroom, the Pacific Media Network and RNZ. If we assume that Google has been similarly parsimonious with them, New Zealand’s total payment to date would be significantly less than NZ$10m. It’s a startlingly small amount compared to the sums distributed to our neighbour, and a cynical verdict on our relative standing as a nation. Thus the launch of News Showcase here is less about its existence as a product – in fact, publishers say it drives negligible traffic – and more about convincing our government that it does not need to proceed with an Australian-style regulatory intervention, as the likes of Canada and France are, and even the US is considering.

The New Zealand media outlets that remain outside those deals can largely be divided into two buckets. The first are organisations too small to be able to get in a room with Google and negotiate a deal. This likely includes hundreds of small newsrooms around the country, from iwi radio stations to community newspapers. The second is the NPA-led collective bargaining group, which The Spinoff has joined, which is seeking deals with Google and Meta that are on the same proportional scale as those done with our colleagues across the Tasman.

While there are some legitimate critiques of the Australian approach, what cannot be denied is the outcome: meaningful and sustainable support for an essential industry, from highly profitable companies which have benefited hugely from having journalism on their services. The alternative is to either let journalism continue to decay, or for the taxpayer to subsidise it. Based on the way the Public Interest Journalism Fund has inadvertently made all media subject to attack and suspicion here in New Zealand, direct taxpayer funding is not an avenue any private sector journalism operator would like to see explored. Deals with tech companies are far more preferable – but unless they are at the same scale as Australia we will see its industry, powered by tech money, cherrypick the best of our journalists, and potentially buy up our operators too.

It’s important to remember that journalism remains a deeply challenged industry. The number of journalists employed here halved in the 12 years to 2018, and there have been rounds of redundancies since. Though there are some green shoots like E-Tangata, The Spinoff and Shit You Should Care About, the total number of journalists employed by those three organisations is equivalent to one medium-sized provincial newsroom. The kind that, absent Australia-scale deals with the tech companies, will continue to shrink and disappear. While the PIJF is currently helping with some of the costs associated with journalism, it is time limited and largely runs out over the next two years. The government has said it would like deals with the tech companies to replace it.


Follow Duncan Greive’s NZ media podcast The Fold on Apple Podcasts, Spotify or your favourite podcast provider.


New broadcasting minister Willie Jackson recently joined me on The Fold to talk about what he would like to see in terms of deals between tech companies and local media. He did not seem open to accepting poorer outcomes for us in Aotearoa than our cousins in Australia – and was well aware that it was the spectre of legislation which ultimately moved the needle there. “Bang,” said Jackson, “the deals came very quickly.”

This contrasts quite starkly with what the tech companies have told us privately. One representative told me in conversation that the Australian deals were one offs, another that there was zero chance of New Zealand being given settlements which were on the same level. That is largely because they don’t believe this government will do the hard work and actually introduce legislation.

Clearly some parts of our media have taken Silicon Valley’s local representatives at their word, as the deals which underpin the launch of Google News Showcase prove. The coming months will make it clear to the rest of New Zealand’s media whether that holds true. Because as much as some big newsrooms are now working with Google, the largest chunk of journalists remain outside, from major employers like Stuff and TVNZ. to small indies like us.

This government has spent the bulk of this term focusing on building out a digital future for its own media assets, allocating hundreds of millions of dollars to the merger of TVNZ and RNZ. There is a sense that it has also quietly been working on legislation which might help create a sustainable basis for the private media sector too, particularly since Jackson took over from Faafoi as minister in charge. Jackson is the true audience for Showcase, and Google will be desperately hoping that the new broadcasting minister accepts their claim that the deals represent fair compensation for Google’s use of journalism in this country.

Unfortunately for Google there is a vast and well-documented gulf between what it has spent here versus Australia. Because our two economies are among the most closely-linked in the world, unless Google and Meta eventually match the kind of deals done there, the threat to the ongoing sustainability of our newsrooms will only increase.


Follow Duncan Greive’s NZ media podcast The Fold on Apple Podcasts, Spotify or your favourite podcast provider.

Image: Tina Tiller
Image: Tina Tiller

BusinessAugust 29, 2022

Teens have brutally dumped Facebook for TikTok. What does that mean for NZ?

Image: Tina Tiller
Image: Tina Tiller

A new study shows just how rapidly Facebook’s teen audience has collapsed, raising important questions for New Zealand media, writes Duncan Greive.

A major new survey of the online behaviour of US teens shows just how fast their behaviour is evolving, particularly the pace of migration from once dominant platforms like Facebook to the ascendant TikTok. The Pew survey backs up data from NZ on Air’s “Where are the Audiences?” survey, which will release a fresh youth-focused survey in October, and suggests that the government’s merger of TVNZ and RNZ will face a profound challenge in reaching the young and diverse audiences it seeks.

The Pew survey was a sequel to one carried out in 2015, well before TikTok was even founded, and shows the pace of change through that period. Most notable is the rapid decline of Facebook, which was then by far the most popular social app for teens, but has dropped to a distant fourth in just seven years.

The question posed asks whether the platform is ever used – suggesting that just a third of US teens even have a Facebook account. By comparison TikTok, Instagram (owned by Meta, Facebook’s parent company) and Snapchat all register well over 50% usage rates among US teens.


Follow Duncan Greive’s NZ media podcast The Fold on Apple Podcasts, Spotify or your favourite podcast provider.


Why does this matter? The behaviour of teenagers has been subject to scrutiny and critique for centuries, but particularly since marketers and sociologists took note of the predictive power of teenage preferences for society as a whole in the 60s. Teen behaviour is now also obsessed over by the tech companies that increasingly shape our lives. Facebook and Instagram, for example, are swiftly overhauling their user experiences and algorithms to try and become more appealing to teens, while also betting the house on the Metaverse being a thing. They view winning back teens as existentially important. Based on this survey, they might well be right.

The mega trend

The most immediately apparent takeaway from the Pew survey is the rise of video. The top four sites all have a major video component, and the top two have almost no other functionality of any consequence. YouTube is a colossus of unmatched ubiquity, with 95% of US teens using the platform, just shy of the 97% who are online at all.

The next three, and the only other platforms with penetration north of 50%: TikTok, debuting at a mind-melting 67% and Instagram and Snapchat, essentially tied at 62% and 59% respectively. Below Facebook (32%) sits a bundle of more specialised social apps like Twitter (23%), Twitch (20%), WhatsApp (17%) and Reddit (14%). Of that group, only Twitch is video-centric, but the fact that a platform built to host livestreaming of gaming (though it has become host to much more) is two-thirds as popular as Facebook shows just how much video has eaten the internet alive.

What’s interesting to think about is whether TikTok is social media at all, at least as we used to know it. It characterises itself as an entertainment platform, it’s deeply disconnected from the social graph, and there is no consistent nudge to post – it’s perfectly happy with you just watching. Add that to the total conquest by YouTube – another platform for non-posters – and it shows teens can live perfectly contented online lives just consuming video and messaging. Which might be a better scenario than the knotty, anxiety-inducing public behaviours this consumption has replaced?

The winners

The Pew study points out that “TikTok and Snapchat stand out for having larger shares of teenage users who visit these platforms regularly. Fully 86% of teen TikTok or Snapchat users say they are on that platform daily and a quarter of teen users for both of these platforms say they are on the site or app almost constantly.”

What’s interesting is that Snapchat has largely stayed in its lane, focused on and beloved by teens. Instagram was able to successfully copy its most popular feature in Stories, and it’s trying to do the same trick again with its TikTok clone Reels. I attended a briefing event for young creators run by Meta this week, and was struck by the palpable fear of TikTok present in the air. Its name was never mentioned, but there were frequent references to the way the Instagram algorithm downranks content featuring a watermark – the signature of TikTok’s cross-platform virality. When your competition won’t even say your name, you know you’re winning.

The losers

Facebook was founded by a teenager in a dorm at Harvard, but nearly 20 years on it’s the undeniable loser here. It has plummeted from 72% penetration – easily dominating the social space – to just 32% today. The New York Times technology writer Kevin Roose caused a stir late last year when he posited that Facebook might be a “dying company”. It remains popular with older people, but dropping 40 points for teens looks irrecoverable. It’s also troubling for Facebook that its biggest audience is poorer white users, perhaps the least coveted demographic in the world.

Twitter, by contrast, also declined, but by just 10 points, to 23%, and now looks like it could plausibly overtake Facebook among teens by mid-decade. This would have been an unimaginable statement a few years ago.

What’s even more troubling for Meta is that Instagram does not look unshakable either. “A majority of teens ages 15 to 17 (73%) say they ever use Instagram, compared with 45% of teens ages 13 to 14 who say the same (a 28-point gap).” This might just indicate that Instagram is a platform typically adopted later in the teen years. Or it might mean that Instagram too is dying, just at a different pace. You can understand the panic in Palo Alto regardless.

The big questions

There are so many. Related to the hyper-growth of video is the decline of platforms that default to text. Will reading for leisure or information become a dying behaviour? As a writer, I hope not, but it certainly looks that way.

Another element which feels important to note is that there is a much lower amount of direct information pushed out of the most popular apps. You don’t say where you are and you don’t select your interests as overtly as on prior platforms. This may well change over time, but the fundamental nature of TikTok seems to lend itself less well to narrow interest-based targeting than Facebook and Google, which might be both bad for those businesses and good for society.

Those designing ANZPM, the new public media entity being built out of the merged RNZ and TVNZ, need to think deeply about this survey. None of these platforms will natively serve you New Zealand content as of right. You can train it to serve you some, and there is plenty on there – but access is a function of your own behaviour. Going to some new government-owned app and consuming professionally produced content seems unlikely to happen. And even if you distribute it well through the likes of TikTok, how confident can you be of it having the impact you desire?

There is also a confronting challenge to everyone from ad agencies to screen production companies. TikTok is the god mode video format right now, the most popular site on the internet. By far the dominant verbal communication form within it is scrappy, straight-down-the-camera speech.

Meanwhile a large chunk of our communications industrial complex is based on attracting audiences with everything from static design to animation to seven-figure film budgets. These are then sprayed onto vast numbers of surfaces, both digital and physical. This has become increasingly a goal of our government, often with the intention of reaching teens and teen-adjacent audiences, as they’re prone to risky behaviours or a lack of awareness about government services.

You can still do that on TikTok – but will it work? This is particularly relevant because while the trends noted by Pew hold relatively strongly for all teens, there are some notable demographic variations. Girls, Black and Hispanic teens all over-index as TikTok users. If this holds true for young, Māori and Pacific audiences, creating content and buying media will continue to get more tricky. (Pan-Asian audiences are more complex again, requiring strategies for WeChat, WhatsApp and more.)

It adds up to a situation in which the top-level platforms used by different demographics are becoming more and more fast-moving, and what those platforms serve audiences is even more diverse again. Short of China-style content and usage restrictions, which no one seems to be proposing, we have no choice but to turn and face this new reality. For everyone in the business of reaching mass audiences, these behaviours are already normal for teens and rapidly becoming so for the rest of us. Now we have to figure out how to collectively respond.


Follow Duncan Greive’s NZ media podcast The Fold on Apple Podcasts, Spotify or your favourite podcast provider.