General News
26 May, 2026
Country Press Australia issues statement on News Bargaining Incentive
Country Press Australia supports the core purpose of the News Bargaining Incentive however, funds must not turn into a general media grants program.
Country Press Australia (CPA) supports the core purpose of the News Bargaining Incentive, to encourage major digital platforms to enter into fair commercial agreements with eligible Australian news publishers.
The NBI must remain focused on that purpose.
Regional, rural and independent publishers have been among the most exposed to the market power of global digital platforms. They employ journalists, produce public interest journalism, serve local communities and carry the obligations of professional news publishing. It is essential that the NBI delivers practical support to those publishers, not only to the largest media companies.
CPA supports sensible measures to ensure small and medium publishers are not excluded from commercial agreements. We recognise the concern that platforms could seek to satisfy their obligations through a limited number of agreements with major media companies. The scheme should be designed to encourage fair dealing with genuine regional, rural and independent publishers that produce covered news content and employ professional journalists.
However, CPA is concerned by proposals to divert a portion of NBI levy funds into a discretionary grants program.
The NBI is not intended to become a general media grants scheme. Its purpose is to incentivise commercial agreements between platforms and eligible news publishers. Where a platform elects not to enter sufficient commercial agreements and a charge is collected, those funds should be returned directly and transparently to eligible news publishers that are investing in journalism.
Top-slicing NBI funds into a supplementary grants pool would risk changing the character of the scheme. It could make the NBI look less like a bargaining incentive and more like a revenue-raising mechanism followed by government redistribution.
That would be a serious policy risk and could strengthen arguments from platforms that the scheme is simply a tax rather than an incentive to support commercial agreements for news.
AdvertisementIt would also risk diverting funds away from professional publishers employing journalists and producing public interest news.
A grants program would inevitably introduce delay, discretion, administration and uncertainty. It may also create pathways for NBI money to flow to organisations that do not meet the same standards, obligations or employment commitments as professional news publishers.
If government wishes to support news deserts, emerging publishers, community media, multicultural media or underrepresented voices through grants, that should be done through a separate program and a separate appropriation, such as the News Media Assistance Program. It should not be funded by carving money out of the NBI.
CPA’s position is clear.
Any NBI distribution mechanism should remain directly tied to eligible news businesses, covered news content, professional editorial standards and the employment of journalists. Funds collected under the NBI should be returned to the news sector through a transparent, objective and journalist-based distribution model, not diverted into a discretionary grants pool.
The survival of regional and independent journalism is too important for the NBI to be diluted or redirected.
The scheme must remain focused on its original purpose, requiring the global platforms that benefit from Australia’s news ecosystem to support the professional publishers and journalists who sustain it.
