Google, the Media Patron: How the Digital Giant Ensnares Journalism

"There is currently very little literature on the relationship between Big Tech and the media. Google's funding programmes for the media, in particular, have to date eluded rigorous scholarly inquiry."

Many news media organisations are facing an economic crisis, and technology companies and their founders are playing a growing role within the media world. In the context of these two related developments, this study by the Otto Brenner Foundation (OBS) examines the relationship between the German news media and the tech corporation Google. As stated in the report, "Since 2015 at the latest, the company has funded the European industry to the tune of several hundred million euros. At the same time, Google is both a technology and business partner to many publishers, as well as an economic competitor. There is therefore a certain tension between Google's roles as a sponsor, partner, competitor, and subject of reporting." One key aim of this study is, therefore, to investigate the motivations behind Google's financial investments and how these ties impact the economic and reporting independence of the media. The study is intended to be exploratory in nature and offers a number of jumping-­off points for further research.

In particular, the research sought to answer the following questions:

1. How did Google's media funding initiatives come about?
2. How did German news media organisations benefit from Google's financial support from the Digital News Innovation Fund within the European Digital News Initiative?
3. How did German news media organisations benefit from events, training, and fellowships financed by Google?
4. To what extent do news media organisations and journalists in Germany use Google products as part of their technical infrastructure?
5. What threats do these ties pose to the independence of the news media and journalists at individual, editorial, and publishing levels?

To answer these questions, the study draws on a range of sources and methods. It uses data analysis of over 600 media projects funded by Google in Europe and 25 interviews with German publishing managers and digital journalists. Google's Europe­-wide support of the media, the Digital News Initiative (DNI) is also subjected to empirical evaluation. A written survey of 22 German media companies provides further insights into their day-to­-day use of Google products and services.

Publicly accessible sources and an interview with Google managers form the basis for answering the first research question outlining the history of Google's funding programmes. The study shows that Google's rise to become a "patron of the media" began in France, where, responding to political pressure, it set up a €60 million fund to support press publishers' innovation projects in 2013. The French fund was the blueprint for the DNI, which Google launched in 2015 and whose core element was the €150­million Digital News Innovation Fund that the company used to promote innovation projects from 2015 to 2019. Examining the political context of these funding programmes reveals that Google's initiatives consistently came about in response to growing political pressure, such as the call to introduce a "Google tax".

Looking at how German news media organisations benefit from Google's financial support, the researchers found that Google's European project grants were not disbursed equally but instead tended to support established, for-­profit, western European publishers. Non­profit media and journalism start­ups were not the focus of funding. The authors make the point that this poses a problem to media pluralism, as the funding helps the already-big players get even bigger, while smaller outlets are disadvantaged. At the same time, the research reveals that Google's grants are filling a gap in funding for technological development in the industry, with many publishing managers saying that their innovation projects would have been impossible without DNI funds.

While most of Google's money goes toward projects for publishing companies, the company also funds events such as the Global Investigative Journalism Conference and hosts its own conferences as part of the Google News Initiative. It also provides funds for fellowships and trainings for journalists and newsroom developers. As stated in the report, "There is barely an industry event in Germany and Europe that takes place without the involvement of the data corporation." Together with their support for training, the authors note that "this not only gives Google a seat at the table during industry discussions; it is also defining a generation of budding media professionals."

To answer the fourth research question, which looked at the technology and economic ties that exist between media companies and Google, a non-representative survey among 22 German publishers shows a growing reliance on Google tools (such as Analytics, the Google Advertising network, Tag Manager, and Search Console) for the distribution and creation of content as well as for monetisation. Discussions with publishing managers and journalists, however, also reveal an ambivalent relationship with the data giant. For example, the interviews show that many press publishers are sceptical when it comes to the "Subscribe with Google" service and fear competition from the corporation in the classified ads sector.

Regarding what threats the financial and technological ties pose to the independence of news media and journalists, both managers and journalists interviewed for the study stressed that there have been no attempts at influencing editorial decisions by Google or its intermediaries, but several journalists talked of a fear of self-censorship amid the growing cooperation with Google. With regard to the protections that news media have or may yet set up to prevent any threat to press independence from their ever-closer ties to Google, the findings are unambiguous. "The industry does not yet appear to have considered ways to emancipate itself from its obliging sponsor and technology partner. Affected publishers, newsrooms, and individuals are evidently little concerned with possible protections; instead, they rely on established approaches such as the separation of editor and publisher roles, refer to existing ethics guidelines, or seek out ad hoc solutions."

To conclude the investigation, the report sets out six hypotheses on the relationship between Google and the media industry. In brief, these are: (i) Google's media funding is a strategic instrument serving the corporation's interests; (ii) Google's money raises concerns among journalists of compromising ties; (iii) Google's funding is worsening economic disparities among media companies; (iv) the media industry is losing its powers of self-reflection through Google's grants for research and conferences; (v) Google is trying to become the dominant technology platform for the news ecosystem; and (vi) funding must be transparent; alternatives to Google money are needed.

Looking ahead, "The challenge facing the news media in a democratic society is to find alternatives that are less likely to endanger their independence. The...European and German debate on public innovation funding for the media must continue."