Can Big Tech be held accountable to pay for content? As the world looks at ways to get Big Tech to pay for content and counter their dominance, Indian media companies face a similar situation: How to regulate without stymying innovation? Former Minister of State of Information Technology, Rajeev Chandrashekhar, in an interview with Moneycontrol's Shweta Punj says that while Big Tech brings a lot to the table, these companies must also comply with established rules and regulations. Excerpts:
You said a few years ago that Big Tech needs to compensate traditional media. It is happening in other countries too. In California, for instance, Google is fighting back on a bill that would force it to make payments to news publishers. Where is India this journey?
I had broached this a few years ago ... I'm glad that the government is taking this forward. The bigger issue is of the nature of the relationship between the big platforms that have dominated the internet and 100s and 1000s of content creators. These platforms are scraping the internet and have access to this content. What is the nature of the relationship? That has been left undiscussed for several decades. Now the main point of monetization is at the front and centre. Who actually benefits from the value of that content? With AI, this problem becomes more compounded because these platforms live off publicly available content to train their models. And those models become multi-billion dollar models. The person, whose content it is, seldom sees the value in that whole value chain when that content is monetized or is used to train. So it is a slightly larger issue that needs to be discussed. When a media house creates original content and it is uploaded on the net, can social media or AI platforms use it without sharing it equitably?
ALSO READ: Big Tech should compensate traditional media for its content, says I&B Minister Ashwini Vaishnaw Has this been discussed with Big Tech in India. Do you expect a sharp pushback?
One of the reasons why this has not moved forward in India is because media, per se, are loath to have the government intervene in what they thought was a contractual relationship between them and social media platforms. For many years, media saw social media platforms as a way for them to expand their reach and take their content to distribute it further at minimal cost. Fast forward to now and media has woken up to the brutal reality that most of the business models are very much controlled and impacted by the presence of these platforms and the contractual agreements they have.
The asymmetry of power has now woken the media up. Unfortunately, it's come at a time when the credibility of media is at rock bottom. It may be the case that there might not be that many people who want to help the media. Because the problem has been created in large part because of media’s apathy and dependance on social media in the last decade. I had many meetings with media heads and asked them why aren’t you asking for it because it sounds like, I , the government is only asking for it. And they would shrug their head. I am glad that legacy media has woken up to the challenge of asymmetry and distortion of power - especially when digital media will be the new normal and legacy media is not that relevant anymore.
Bargaining code in Australia, that is designed to have large technology platforms pay local news publishers, has been somewhat successful. Can India adopt something similar. How will regulation play out on the ground and what has prompted this sudden realization?
They [Big Tech] have realized that platforms are squeezing them and revenue sharing agreement of monetization are sharing between those who create and distribute content is asymmetric. It is working to the benefit of the platform rather than the media creator or the media company. I think it is that what has woken up the media. The more power these platforms have on advertising and monetization, the more they will misuse that power. That is what is happening. What will be the nature of law and regulation? Whether this falls under the ambit of competition law or does this fall under the broader technology regulation and jurisprudence that needs to evolve. That needs to be debated. What we are seeing is the first step that there is asymmetry that could be misused. I believe no platform should be allowed to misuse that power, be it against media or an individual creator.
Do the existing acts cover some aspects of this debate?
It could be very well that the government’s view is that this could be dealt with in competition law ... those are fundamental issues that need to be discussed on what would be the architecture as we face new challenges of AI, privacy, etc. When I was in the government, I had proposed that this be a technology-led legislation.
As someone who has been an entrepreneur, how do you ensure regulation without stifling innovation?
The biggest challenge for the government, especially governments in our country which for 65 years has seen regulation as a way of controlling corporates, is to evolve into a light touch regulation ... that it is not heavy handed. We have demonstrated to the world with the data protection law that we passed under PM Narendra Modi that our approach to something as difficult as data protection and privacy is in sharp contrast to how the Europeans dealt with it. The Prime Minister said from the get-go that it should not be a binary of citizen rights or innovation. It should be innovation while safeguarding citizens' rights. We are moving in a direction which is becoming an example for the rest of the world on how we can balance both.
Can India evolve its own model in holding Big Tech accountable?
I don’t see Big Tech as the enemy in the room. It’s not an antagonistic relationship we have. They bring a lot to the table in terms of supporting our own innovation ecosystem. So they are certainly legitimate partners to India’s aspirations to the future of tech. But at the same, they need to be told certain rules and expectations that government of India has. We want Big Tech to succeed but not at the cost of Indian entrepreneurs—instead, by collaborating with them. We need to move to a new framework that allows, permits and enables that.
The US presidential results came as a surprise. Your key takeway from the election results and the role played by Big Tech and social media?
One thing that the US election has shown ... is that the credibility of legacy media has taken a beating. A lot of prima donna editors have been proven wrong. Social media has become the disruptor. They [platforms] have become the carriers of truth that effectively threaten what used to be an almost unquestioned position of traditional media as purveyers of truth and impartiality. There is a move away from traditional media ... citizen journalism has become a powerful way to communicate news and facts.
Watch the full interview here:
Discover the latest Business News, Sensex, and Nifty updates. Obtain Personal Finance insights, tax queries, and expert opinions on Moneycontrol or download the Moneycontrol App to stay updated!
