Critics of the government's revised News Bargaining Incentive warn that the policy may inadvertently weaken the bargaining power of Australian media organizations. While the government has raised the headline levy rate to 2.5%, the decision to narrow the calculation base to digital advertising revenue—rather than total gross revenue—is viewed by some as a significant concession to global tech giants. Policy analysts suggest that this technical shift could make it easier for platforms to offer lower-value commercial agreements while still meeting the threshold to avoid the levy, potentially leaving publishers with less funding than they might have secured under the original proposal.
There are also concerns regarding the international implications of the policy. Industry groups, such as the National Foreign Trade Council, have argued that the legislation unfairly targets American digital service providers and risks creating friction in bilateral trade relationships. By placing the burden of funding local journalism on a small group of foreign companies, the government is seen by some as avoiding more sustainable, long-term solutions to the challenges facing the media industry. Critics argue that the focus should be on broader structural reforms rather than relying on levies that could be perceived as digital trade barriers.
Finally, there is skepticism about whether these deals truly serve the public interest. Past experience with the 2021 code showed that even when deals were signed, some large publishers continued to reduce staff and close regional titles. If the new incentive structure leads to cheaper, less substantial agreements, it may fail to provide the meaningful support that struggling newsrooms require. For those skeptical of the plan, the current approach risks becoming a cycle of regulatory intervention that creates administrative complexity without delivering the promised revitalization of the Australian news sector.