Selected Papers of #AoIR2023: The 24th Annual Conference of the Association of Internet Researchers Philadelphia, PA, USA / 18-21 Oct 2023 Suggested Citation (APA): Seipp, T. J. (2023, October). The Great Reset: “Counterpower” In The Context Of Media Concentration And Platform Dependence. Paper presented at AoIR2023: The 24th Annual Conference of the Association of Internet Researchers. Philadelphia, PA, USA: AoIR. Retrieved from http://spir.aoir.org. The Great Reset: “Counterpower” in the context of media concentration and platform dependence Theresa Josephine Seipp University of Amsterdam Abstract The growing concentration of power and dependence on few platforms in the media sector necessitate regulatory measures to counter the potential threats to media pluralism and editorial independence stemming from this concentration. While some legal initiatives aim to address the imbalanced power dynamics between platforms and news media, such as the efforts at the EU level through the Digital Services Act (DSA) and Digital Markets Act (DMA) to establish a fair playing field in digital markets, it is crucial to empower countervailing forces. This article explores the concept of "counterpower" within the context of media concentration and platform dependence, delving into its theoretical and practical implications. The practical analysis is grounded in 12 semi-structured interviews conducted with news organisations of various sizes in the UK and the Netherlands, revealing a heightened awareness of the necessity to reduce dependences and promote more direct and engaged journalism. The interviews identified specific strategies, albeit with some limitations, highlighting the need for additional support, especially for local news organisations striving for autonomy in reducing dependences. In a nutshell, the article examines the legal prerequisites for news organisations to establish a "counterpower," serving as a complementary piece of the larger puzzle in addressing the broader challenges of media concentration and platform dependence. Finally, alongside the evolving EU regulatory framework, encompassing the DSA, DMA, and EMFA, there is a growing demand for enabling “counterpower” and developing robust media (concentration) laws in Europe, particularly focusing on safeguarding local journalism. Research questions This article addresses two main research questions. First, based on the conceptual and empirical analysis, I aim to address RQ1 “What is “counterpower” theoretically, and how does it look like in practice?”. Second, based on a normative legal analysis, I address RQ2, which asks “How could the legal conditions be created to facilitate the formation of “counterpower”?”, thereby concluding with a legal and policy analysis. Contribution A better understanding of the goals and commitments, strategies, and (legal) challenges underlying the exercise of “counterpower” by news organizations helps inform lawmakers in developing effective responses to the changing media environment. The goal is to bridge the disciplinary gaps between (digital) journalism studies, communication science, and law and policy. To tackle the challenges of increasing opinion power wielded by platforms, growing (structural) dependencies and concentrated power in the media, empirical evidence from the ground (the news organization) is needed to inform effective lawmaking. Further, it will help detect current (legal) gaps in the system and create a (legal) environment more favorable of an independent and autonomous news media, a pluralistic media landscape, and the promotion of public and democratic values. Methodology Between March and September 2023, I conducted 12 semi-structured interviews, lasting approximately 45-60 minutes each, with experts from news organizations in the UK (7) and the Netherlands (5). The interviewees included key personnel in areas such as public policy, legal affairs, innovation, data and technology, platform, and commercial strategy. The interviews aimed to explore the concept of "counterpower" in practice and contribute an industry perspective to debates on platform dependence, power concentration, and media pluralism. The conversations were recorded, transcribed, and analyzed through a mixed method of deductive and inductive coding with Atlas.ti. The analysis focused on three main themes: A) audience relationship and attention, B) technological innovation and independence, and C) economic viability and sustainability. Within each theme, an inductive approach was employed to code relevant passages, identifying goals, strategies, and challenges related to "counterpower." During this period, discussions intensified about AI implementation in the media, specifically generative AI. While this article primarily explores platform power in the media, noteworthy is the role of companies like Google and Microsoft, leading in AI development. The consequences of their focus shift on AI and some withdrawing from the news industry remain uncertain but significantly impact ongoing regulatory, policy debates, and industry strategies aimed at balancing power dynamics. Empirical Findings The literature review and conceptualization of "counterpower" explore various grounds for its exercise, particularly in response to challenges posed by platform mediation in news distribution. This triggers organizations to implement strategic countermeasures aiming to regain control over their audiences. Interviews reveal a dual commitment to "counterpower": normative and professional journalistic values and economic control. Goals and Commitments Public Interest Driven: Normative and Professional Journalistic Values: News organizations, classified as "quality news media," integrate their democratic mission into their core identity. Despite concerns, news organizations stay on social media platforms to meet audiences where they are, focusing on building trust, cultivating direct relationships, and upholding ethical and professional principles. This commitment extends to transforming the culture and public perception of journalism as a "public good." Economic Interest Driven: Commercial and Strategic Control: Beyond normative goals, organizations are motivated by economic interests, emphasizing integrity and autonomy in digital and innovation strategies. The overarching aim is to exercise control over infrastructures, data, technologies, and skills. Independence from external funding for sustainable business models is crucial, considering external limits on complete control. "Counterpower" Strategies 1. Direct and Engaged Journalism: Building direct and engaged journalism emerges as an effective "counterpower" strategy, contributing to both normative and economic goals. This involves building trust, enhancing subscriptions, and fostering a loyal readership. Despite a commitment to direct engagement, interactions often occur via social media, raising questions about the necessity of complete disengagement. 2. Diversify Dependence: Complementing direct and engaged journalism, diversifying dependence is highlighted as a crucial "counterpower" strategy. Excessive dependence on few platforms creates a "feedback loop," strengthening platform power. Organizations seek control over dependence, considering options such as reliance on various platforms, alternative providers with higher privacy standards, or investing in developing their tools. In navigating technological innovation and constraints, "counterpower" does not mandate complete independence but emphasizes control over tool usage, relationships with providers, and adherence to professional and ethical standards. News organizations play a pivotal role in shaping the transformation of the news landscape through strategic decisions regarding technology use, including diversifying dependence on different platforms, providers, or investing in proprietary tools and platforms. Legal Discussion Numerous regulatory initiatives, such as the DSA, DMA, EMFA, AI Act in Europe aim to address power imbalances, ensure fair competition, and uphold values like media freedom and pluralism. While these proposals present interesting provisions, their effectiveness is subject to limitations. To foster direct and engaged journalism, power dynamics between news media and the audience must be dispersed. The DSA, for instance, addresses systemic risks from recommender algorithms, mandating transparency and user control. Article 27 requires very large online platforms (VLOPs) using recommender systems to disclose parameters and offer user adjustments, contributing to a potential rebalancing of relationships. The EMFA proposal focuses on media concentration issues, emphasizing the need for EU Member States to assess and regulate media concentration independently from competition law. Acknowledging platforms' roles in opinion formation, the proposal calls for legislation to effectively assess media concentration in the digital age. Concrete guidance and clarity on the role of national media authorities are essential. Diversifying dependencies for news organizations necessitates a diverse array of alternative providers. The DMA targets dominant platforms, imposing stricter obligations to counterbalance market concentration. This can create a fairer business environment, encourage innovation, and offer consumers more choices, fostering diversification in the news industry. Ensuring technologies, platforms, and providers meet security, privacy, and copyright standards is crucial. Effective enforcement of existing laws, particularly in privacy, data protection, security, and copyright, is essential for leveraging the benefits of digitalization. AI regulation should address transparency concerns in development, especially regarding copyright infringements. Reframing tax laws may be necessary to support and subsidize journalism while preventing tech monopolies from exploiting their position. In essence, "counterpower" should be a central consideration in legal and policy discussions on power concentration and platform dependence in the media. It entails empowering news organizations to exert control over their operations, fostering independence, autonomy, and agency in their relationships, all while striking a delicate balance to safeguard media, promote pluralism, and remove barriers without stifling innovation or creating legal uncertainty. References (non-exhaustive): Baker EC, ‘Media Concentration: Giving up on Democracy’ (2002) 54 Flordia Law Review 839 ——, Media Concentration and Democracy: Why Ownership Matters (Cambridge University Press 2007) Bernholz L, Landemore H and Reich R (eds), Digital Technology and Democratic Theory (University of Chicago Press 2021) Blagojev T and others, ‘News Deserts in Europe: Assessing Risks for Local and Community Media in the 27 EU Member States’ (2023) EUI, RSC, Preliminary Report Brantner C, Rodríguez-Amat JR and Belinskaya Y, ‘Structures of the Public Sphere: Contested Spaces as Assembled Interfaces’ (2021) 9 Media and Communication 16 Castells M, ‘Communication, Power and Counter-Power in the Network Society’ (2007) 1 International Journal of Communication 238 Chua S and Westlund O, ‘Platform Configuration: A Longitudinal Study and Conceptualization of a Legacy News Publisher’s Platform-Related Innovation Practices’ (2022) 1 Online Media and Global Communication 60 Cohen J, ‘Turning Privacy Inside Out’ (2018) 20 Theoretical Inquiries in Law 17 De-Lima-Santos M-F and others, ‘Google News Initiative’s Influence on Technological Media Innovation in Africa and the Middle East’ (2023) 11 Media and Communication accessed 13 September 2023 Diakopolous N, Automating the News: How Algorithms Are Rewriting the News (Harvard University Press 2019) Dijk, van J, De Waal M and Poell T, The Platform Society (Oxford University Press 2018) Dodds T and others, ‘Popularity-Driven Metrics: Audience Analytics and Shifting Opinion Power to Digital Platforms’ [2023] Journalism Studies 1 Drunen MZ van and Fechner D, ‘Safeguarding Editorial Independence in an Automated Media System: The Relationship Between Law and Journalistic Perspectives’ (2022) 0 Digital Journalism 1 EPRA, ‘Online Platforms: Inevitable Partners in the Battle for Attention?’ (EPRA 2023) Ferrer-Conill R and Tandoc EC, ‘The Audience-Oriented Editor: Making Sense of the Audience in the Newsroom’ (2018) 6 Digital Journalism 436 Gillerspie T, ‘The Politics of Platforms’ (2010) 12 New Media & Society 347 Han B-C, What Is Power? (Daniel Steuer tr, English edition, Polity Press 2019) Heawood J and Peter F, ‘Co-Creational Media: Committing to Truth and Public Participation’ (Public Interest News Foundation 2023) Helberger N, ‘Challenging Diversity - Social Media Platforms and a New Conception of Media Diversity’ in Damian Tambini and Martin Moore (eds), Digital Dominance (Oxford University Press 2018) ——, ‘On the Democratic Role of News Recommenders’ (2019) 7 Digital Journalism 993 ——, ‘The Political Power of Platforms: How Current Attempts to Regulate Misinformation Amplify Opinion Power’ (2020) 8 Digital Journalism ——, ‘Die Regulierung von Sozialen Medien Aus Einer International Vergleichenden Perspektive’ in Wolfgang Schulz and Keno Potthast (eds), Wissenschaftskommunikation und social media zwischen Rechtsschutz und Regulierungsbedarf (Berlin-Brandenburgische Akademie der Wissenschaften 2021) Ingram M, ‘Should the Media Quit Facebook?’ Columbia Journalism Review (9 May 2019) ——, ‘Will Facebook Changes Leave News Media out in the Cold?’ Columbia Journalism Review (28 July 2022) ——, ‘Is Facebook Quitting the News Business?’ Columbia Journalism Review (7 December 2022) ——, ‘Canada Imitates Australia’s News-Bargaining Law, but to What End?’ Columbia Journalism Review (16 March 2023) International Media Support (IMS), ‘Lack of Independent Media Funding Is a Major Cause of News Desertification around Europe’ International Media Support (IMS) (10 July 2023) Kristensen LM and Hartley JM, ‘The Infrastructure of News: Negotiating Infrastructural Capture and Autonomy in Data-Driven News Distribution’ (2023) 11 Media and Communication accessed 13 September 2023 Lecheler S and De Vreese CH, ‘News Media, Knowledge, and Political Interest: Evidence of a Dual Role From a Field Experiment: News Media, Knowledge, and Political Interest’ (2017) 67 Journal of Communication 545 Lukes S, Power: A Radical View (Third edition, Red Globe press 2021) Lynskey O, ‘Regulating “Platform Power”’ [2017] LSE Law, Society and Economy Working Papers 1/2017 Meese J, Digital Platforms and the Press (Intellect 2023) Moore M and Tambini D, Regulating Big Tech: Policy Responses to Digital Dominance (1. Edition, Oxford University Press 2022) Nechushtai E, ‘Could Digital Platforms Capture the Media through Infrastructure?’ (2018) 19 Journalism 1043 Nemitz P and Pfeffer M, ‘Determining Our Technological and Democratic Future: A Wish List’ in Damian Tambini (ed), Regulating Big Tech. Policy Responses to Digital Dominance (1st edn, Oxford University Press 2022) Neuberger C, ‘Meinungsmacht Im Internet Aus Kommunikationswissenschaftlicher Sicht’ [2018] UFITA Neuberger C and Lobigs F, ‘Meinungsmacht Im Internet Und Die Digitalstrategien von Medienunternehmen. Neue Machtverhältnisse Trotz Expandierender Internetgeschäfte Der Traditionellen Massenmedien-Konzerne.’ [2018] Die Medienanstalten Newman N and others, ‘Digital News Report 2023’ (Reuters Institute for the Study of Journalism 2023) Nielsen RK and Ganter SA, The Power of Platforms (Oxford University Press 2022) Papaevangelou C, ‘Funding Intermediaries: Google and Facebook’s Strategy to Capture Journalism’ [2023] Digital Journalism 1 Papaevangelou C, ‘Funding Intermediaries: Google and Facebook’s Strategy to Capture Journalism.’ Digital Journalism Pickard V, Democracy without Journalism (Oxford University Press 2020) ——, ‘Restructuring Democratic Infrastructures: A Policy Approach to the Journalism Crisis’ (2020) 8 Digital Journalism Poell T, Nieborg DB and Duffy BE, ‘Spaces of Negotiation: Analyzing Platform Power in the News Industry’ [2022] Digital Journalism 1 Radcliffe D and Mathews N, ‘Tow Report: Building a Stronger Local Media Ecosystem: The Role of Media Policy’ Columbia Journalism Review (20 April 2023) Radsch C, ‘Frenemies: Global Approaches to Rebalance the Big Tech v Journalism Relationship’ (2022) ——, ‘Platformization and Media Capture: A Framework for Regulatory Analysis of Media-Related Platform Regulations’ (2023) 28 UCLA Journal of Law & Technology, Platforms and the Press 75 Sawers P, ‘Meta to Deprecate Facebook News in the UK, Germany and France’ TechCrunch (5 September 2023) Schiffrin A (ed), Media Capture: How Money, Digital Platforms, and Governments Control the News (Columbia University Press 2021) Schulz W, Gewährleistung Kommunikativer Chancengleichheit Als Freiheitsverwirklichung (Materialien zur rechtswissenschaftlichen Medien-und Informationsforschung, 1998) ——, ‘Kontrolle Vorherrschender Meinungsmacht - Rekonstruktion Eines Medienrechtlichen Schlüsselbegriffs’ (2017) 48 AfP 373 Schulz W and Held T, ‘Die Zukunft Der Kontrolle Der Meinungsmacht’ (FES (Friedrich- Ebert-Stiftung) 2006) Seipp TJ, ‘News Media’s Dependency on Big Tech: Should We Be Worried?’ (Internet Policy Review, 10 June 2021) ——, ‘Media Concentration Law: Gaps and Promises for the Digital Age’ (2023) 11 Media & Communication ——, ‘Dealing with Opinion Power in the Platform World: Why We Really Have to Rethink Media Concentration Law’ [2023] Digital Journalism Simon F, ‘Uneasy Bedfellows: AI in the News, Platform Companies and the Issue of Journalistic Autonomy.’ (2022) 10 Digital Journalism 1832 Simon FM, ‘AI Will Not Revolutionise Journalism, but It Is Far from a Fad’ (Oxford Internet Institute, 6 March 2023) Stroud NJ and Van Duyn E, ‘Curbing the Decline of Local News by Building Relationships with the Audience’ (2023) 73 Journal of Communication 452 Tambini D, Media Freedom (Polity Press 2021) Van Drunen MZ and Fechner D, ‘Safeguarding Editorial Independence in an Automated Media System: The Relationship Between Law and Journalistic Perspectives’ [2022] Digital Journalism 1