• Accessibility
• Email alerts
• RSS feeds
• Contact us

The future of news Contents

---

Chapter 4: Tech platforms

The world that was

71.Much has been written about the impacts of tech platforms on the news industry. On the positive side, companies such as Google, Apple, Meta, X and others offer routes to the news market, new audiences and spaces for new business models to develop.148 Nearly one third of all visits to news publishers’ sites come via online intermediaries.149

72.On the more negative side, industry experts say these changes have led to big tech dominance of the advertising market, upended business models, created strategic dependencies, intermediated access to news and hence control over customer data, reduced bargaining power over the financial value of news, and raised concerns about ‘brand blindness’ as media firms lose control over the way their content is presented and users struggle to identify sources (or spot those simply masquerading as legitimate outlets).150 Younger generations are now reading less as short form video becomes more dominant.151 The structure of some social media sites has further incentivised some outlets to offer ever more content and more opinions,152 and enabled users to self-select news that reinforces existing views.153

What role?

73.Tech platforms have different approaches to news. Meta has been moving decisively away from news and seems unlikely to return soon, though the implications of its recent generative AI deal with Reuters remain unclear.154 Apple by contrast has various commercial arrangements with news outlets.155 Google’s News Showcase provides a partnership and aggregation service with stories selected by editors, as well as numerous news project funding initiatives, alongside innovation-focused funding through the Google News Initiative.156 X (formerly Twitter) is pursuing its own approach to news; we remain unclear about its long term direction.

74.Some industry experts advocate making tech firms pay publishers directly for news content appearing on their platform.157 In California, the State Senate considered legislation to this effect.158 Canada negotiated financial agreements between Google and news organisations, recently valued at circa £59 million.159

75.Making this work is not easy though. When legislation was being considered in California, Google said it was “pausing further investment in the California news ecosystem”.160 When Australia passed a law, Facebook reportedly withheld news provision and Google warned about damaging news services until financial agreements were reached privately.161 ITN noted that, when Canada sought to implement legislation requiring tech platforms to pay news publishers, “Facebook walked away and pulled news from the platform and has never offered it since”.162

76.Hypothecated taxes raised through other sources (such as on digital advertising) may have more appeal, as they would allow governments to spend the money raised on news media support projects. Such taxes might also raise similar challenges however.163 These issues will become still more complex as news outlets negotiate payments for generative AI training, explored in the next chapter.

Prominence

77.Boosting the online prominence of quality news journalism is another longstanding industry proposal.164 We heard mixed views about formalising such ideas through a kitemark scheme however.165 Deciding who gets prominence would be difficult—most media outlets might stake a claim.166 DMG Media noted the complexities and suggested that organisational criteria (i.e. having governance and editorial structures) rather than the quality or type of product should be the key consideration.167 Similar schemes like the Journalism Trust Initiative already exist.168 Google told us that it already promotes trusted news, for example via YouTube’s news section.169

78.The Media Reform Coalition argued that the way tech firms prioritise content already means that most of the news comes from “dominant news organisations that control large shares of traditional news markets.”170 Angelos Frangopoulos, CEO of GB News, raised concerns around market barriers and risks of Government involvement.171 Ofcom’s experimental studies suggest that trust scoring tools tend to reinforce existing views on news sources rather than having a practical impact on the types of news which the public want to read.172

79.We encourage tech platforms to give more prominence to recognised news publishers (as defined in the Online Safety Act 2023), for example through better visual cues or adjusting prominence on user feeds. This should be an industry-led initiative: we do not support a mandatory Government-led kitemark scheme.

Limiting legitimate content

80.Mr Nelson of The Spectator raised concerns about tech firms removing legitimate news content. While the Online Safety Act 2023 has protections for recognised news publishers, he highlighted grey areas such as ‘shadow bans’, where content is not technically taken down but subtly downgraded by opaque algorithms with the result that few users see it. He cited examples of TikTok demoting content critical of the Chinese government and YouTube banning speeches of parliamentarians challenging Government lockdown policies during the pandemic.173

81.Channel 4 raised related concerns about YouTube imposing age restrictions on news stories despite the programmes being compliant with Ofcom’s watershed rules.174 In the time it takes to resolve the dispute, the story is no longer current. Ofcom said that the Online Safety Act would speed up complaints procedures.175

82.We are concerned that tech platforms have been imposing age restrictions on news that is Ofcom-compliant. We are also concerned at reports of ‘shadow bans’ and the blocking of other legitimate content.

83.Ofcom should engage with tech platforms at pace to align content moderation policies with Ofcom’s broadcasting codes and the duties contained in the Online Safety Act 2023. When implementing the Act’s protections for news publishers, Ofcom should pay particular attention to grey areas where content is not blocked but subtly downranked to minimise user engagement.

Algorithmic transparency

84.Dame Melanie Dawes, CEO of Ofcom, told us that the lack of transparency about how tech platforms’ recommender algorithms work remained “one of the biggest challenges” around improving the health of the online media ecosystem. She called for the regulator or vetted researchers to be given access for testing.176 Audits of algorithms could investigate potential biases or the impacts of service changes,177 something likely to be increasingly important as the political leanings of generative AI products attract increasing scrutiny.178

85.Under the Digital Markets, Competition and Consumers Act 2024, the Competition and Markets Authority could require greater transparency over recommender algorithms, but there are various limitations.179 The Online Safety Act 2023 will require some platforms to publish annual transparency reports.180 The Data (Use and Access) Bill seeks to require tech platforms to provide information to researchers in relation to online safety.181 The EU Digital Services Act requires large platforms to disclose further information on recommender algorithms, indicating that wider transparency in the UK is achievable.182 Mr McCabe suggested that platforms could run different algorithms in parallel, creating more transparency about the impact of changes on users’ feeds.183 Google said it already “provides significant transparency to users why they are seeing what they see” and did “not believe further Ofcom powers are necessary”.184

86.More transparency over tech platforms’ algorithms is needed (even if transparency on its own will not be enough). Empowering the regulators quickly is necessary and achievable. The Government should give Ofcom the necessary powers to investigate tech firm recommender algorithms and the operations of large language models (LLMs). This will become increasingly important amid concerns about the potential for political influence and bias in LLMs.

---

• A-Z index
• Glossary
• Contact us
• Freedom of Information
• Jobs
• Using this website
• Copyright
• Privacy notice
• Cookie policy
• Cookie Manager