ppa.tbcserver19.com

Category: Policy and advocacy latest news

  • PPA submits response to CMA’s consultation on Google’s proposed conduct requirements

    PPA submits response to CMA’s consultation on Google’s proposed conduct requirements

    This consultation represents one of the most significant interventions to date aimed at rebalancing the relationship between dominant platforms and content creators. If implemented effectively, the CMA’s regime could provide publishers with the transparency, control, and fairness that have long been absent from the search ecosystem.

    In our response, we strongly welcome the CMA’s action to address entrenched market power in search and to introduce measures aimed at restoring a fairer value exchange between Google and publishers. However, we also emphasise that meaningful change will depend on the strength, specificity, and enforceability of the final CRs.

    Sajeeda Merali, CEO, PPA said: “This is a welcome step from the CMA and an important opportunity to rebalance the relationship between publishers and Google. It rightly recognises the significant market power held within search and the dependence many publishers have on that gateway to reach audiences.

    The proposed Fair Ranking Conduct Requirement acknowledges long-standing concerns about visibility and predictability, while the focus on AI-driven search reflects the real risks publishers face around content use, traffic, and commercial sustainability.

    Any new opt-out mechanisms must be meaningful and enforceable, giving publishers genuine control and clear insight into how their content is used and its impact on revenue.

    We remain committed to constructive engagement with Google and other platforms, but that relationship must be built on fairness and mutual respect, recognising the value publishers bring to the wider digital ecosystem.”

    Key points from the PPA’s submission

    Immediate work needed on a payment for content CR

    We urge the CMA to begin developing a fair payment framework now alongside the implementation of the current CRs. Transparency and control are essential, but without a parallel pathway towards remuneration, publishers remain in a structurally unequal bargaining position.

    Transparency must be a pre‑requisite for meaningful control

    Publishers cannot exercise choice without clear visibility. Our submission stresses the need for:

    • Real, disaggregated data on content crawling and use
    • Clarity on whether content is used for training, fine‑tuning, or grounding
    • Product‑specific engagement and traffic data across Search, AI Overviews, AI Mode, Discover and other surfaces
    • Consistent tracking parameters that pass through to analytics tools such as GA4

    Without this information, the controls risk becoming nominal rather than practical.

    Controls must offer meaningful granularity

    We highlight to the CMA that publishers must be able to opt out:

    • Per feature (e.g., AI Overviews vs AI Mode)
    • Per purpose (training, fine‑tuning, grounding)

    The current grouping of all search generative AI features together is insufficient and continues to lock publishers into “all or nothing” decisions. We also stress the need for a clear and precise definition of “grounding” to ensure the associated controls work as intended.

    Mandatory consent interaction with publishers

    We recommend that Google be required to proactively seek publisher consent, for example via a consent banner in Search Console, rather than relying on publishers finding and interpreting publicly available information. Given the power imbalance, a passive opt‑out regime is not an adequate or fair mechanism.

    Need for ongoing, independent compliance audits

    We call for recurring, independently run audits rather than a single baseline assessment to test compliance, ensure content is not used where it has been opted out, and assess whether publishers are being harmed through punitive ranking effects.

    Requirement for separate crawlers

    We express strong concerns about Google’s proposal to retain a single unified crawler for both search indexing and AI-related content use. This approach undermines transparency, prevents publishers from exercising meaningful control, and leaves Google out of step with competitors who offer dedicated, segregated crawlers.

    Protection against punitive ranking practices

    While we welcome the Fair Ranking CR, we emphasise that:

    • Google must not be allowed to punish publishers directly or indirectly for opting out
    • Ranking signals from one surface (e.g., AI features) must not bleed into another (traditional search)
    • Google should be required to test and prevent harmful “second‑order effects” and be subject to independent verification

    Search engine choice screen must not include AI assistant tools

    We agree with a browser‑level search engine choice screen, but we argue that AI assistant tools like ChatGPT and Perplexity should not be included. These tools are fundamentally different from search engines, operate outside existing licensing frameworks, and are currently beyond the scope of the CMA’s SMS designation.

    Eilidh Wilson, Head of Policy & Public Affairs, PPA commented: “The PPA’s consultation response reflects the views of more than 200 publisher members, ranging from major consumer brands and business media to independent and specialist publishers. While there is broad support for the CMA’s proposed interventions, publishers remain cautious about whether they will deliver the outcomes publishers need.

    Google remains the UK’s dominant search provider and is fundamental to the sustainability of trusted editorial brands. For publishers, transparency is a prerequisite for control: without clear, end-to-end insight into how content is crawled, used, and attributed, opt-out controls risk existing only in theory. That is why the CMA’s measures must deliver granular, per-feature controls over AI-driven search products, alongside safeguards that allow publishers to exercise those choices without fear of detriment.

    If executed effectively, these measures could be transformative for the publishing sector, which employs over 55,000 people and contributes billions of pounds to the UK economy.”

    Next steps

    The PPA will continue to work closely with members and with the CMA to secure the refinements necessary to ensure these remedies deliver real, not theoretical, benefits.

    You can read the PPA’s submission in full here.

    If you’d like to discuss our submission or contribute further evidence, please contact Eilidh Wilson, Head of Policy and Public Affairs: eilidh.wilson@ppa.co.uk.

  • AI scams: consumer protection debated in parliament

    AI scams: consumer protection debated in parliament

    A survey from McAfee showed that 1 in 10 people had been targeted by AI voice scams, with 77% of victims losing money as a result. This is not only happening to consumers, but businesses are also being targeted. Scammers often pose as businesses to fool consumers into believing they are being contacted by trusted establishments, which might impact the credibility of businesses who are victims of this.

    Similarly, there is the threat of the rise of AI-powered disinformation ahead of the general election, and the impact of AI scams being estimated to run into the billions.

    Such sophisticated measures require imminent attention – not just where AI scams affect the general election, but also where consumers and businesses are being affected at the hands of this.

    As many PPA members are B2C publishers, it’s important that businesses are aware of the risks that may be associated with AI scams, to avoid scams happening to your own business. The PPA is calling for better regulation on the back of the Government’s response to the AI White Paper.

    For more information on the debate, click here. If you have any questions or would like to find out more, contact our Policy and Public Affairs Manager, Eilidh.wilson@ppa.co.uk.

  • Nicola Sturgeon resigns: so what happens next?

    Nicola Sturgeon resigns: so what happens next?

    On 15th February Nicola Sturgeon announced her resignation as First Minister of Scotland. Her speech cited both political and personal reasons for her decision.

    Sturgeon noted that the UK Supreme Court’s blocking of an independence referendum and her decision to seek a “de facto referendum” at the next general election – which would see an SNP majority in votes count as a vote for independence – played a role. Despite it being believed that many in the SNP see this course of action as a vote-loser, Sturgeon said she was confident there was majority support in Scotland for independence and that she could have led the party to victory at the next election.

    Nevertheless, she felt views about her had become entrenched and that the baton should be passed to a figure without controversy to maximise the SNP’s chances of electoral and independence success. She claimed that by standing down, she could “free” the SNP to choose its direction at a conference next month.

    What next?

    The new leader will need to bridge Sturgeon’s supporters – who are a majority within the SNP – and her vocal critics. Historically, the SNP was divided over fundamentalists – who wanted to declare independence as soon as possible – and gradualists, who saw devolution and government in Scotland as a route to independence. The gradualists won that battle under Alex Salmond but since the 2014 referendum, impatience for independence has grown within the party and internal divisions have brought about a return to the pre-2014 dividing lines. Sturgeon was a gradualist, intent on building majority support for independence. Her call for a “de facto referendum” last year therefore seemed out of character: an admission of weakness in the face of both constitutional realities and internal critics.

    A new SNP leader will be in an unquestionably precarious position. They will need to find a way to independence that satisfies both those who want to play within the UK government’s rules, and hard-liners who are increasingly attracted to more controversial options, including a unilateral declaration of independence. Under Alex Salmond, the SNP was famed for its discipline; though divisions over Brexit and controversial policies like the Named Person Scheme – though minor relative to divisions in the Tories and Labour – signalled an end to the era of uniformity.

    Though the failure of Alex Salmond’s Alba Party has helped to ensure the SNP is unlikely to fracture, ill discipline risks its election-winning record as does a resurgent Labour Party. SNP members will be acutely aware that, if the party falters, so does the hope of independence. The new leader will therefore also have to be a determined and convincing campaigner for independence.

    Potential successors

    A remarkable factor of this decision is that, in Sturgeon’s long period in office, no obvious candidate has emerged. Though this list includes MPs, Sturgeon made clear the party is looking for a new leader and a new first minister, meaning that anyone not currently in Holyrood is a highly unlikely candidate.

    1. Kate Forbes, Cabinet Secretary for Finance
      Forbes has impressed colleagues, the often SNP-sceptic Scottish business sector, and even UK civil servants; though she appears to lack Sturgeon’s aggressive zeal, which may make her be less attractive to her party.
      Sceptical commentators tend to focus on her socially conservative views; though her classically liberal approach to economics is likely the greater obstacle for a party with many self-identified socialists in its membership.

    1. Humza Yousaf, Health Secretary
      Sturgeon has long valued him as a competent, involved minister and as a bullish campaigner. He is, however, not universally popular among colleagues and some in the party may fear minor scandals and messaging clangers could blow into something bigger.

    1. Angus Robertson, Former Westminster leader and Constitution Secretary
      Robertson represents continuity Sturgeonism. He has long embodied the europhile, socially liberal approach the SNP has hoped will win liberal No voters to independence. He combines this, however, with an occasional abrasiveness both in public and in dealings with colleagues. This may undermine his chances.

    1. Keith Brown, Deputy leader of the party
      Brown has served as a “safe pair of hands” in various government roles. His low profile may make him look like an outsider but a long-running Holyrood rumour has favoured him as the one candidate who can unite pro-Sturgeon supporters and critics.

    1. John Swinney, Deputy First Minister and former leader
      Swinney has proven himself as a loyal, competent minister. His disastrous term as leader may have spoiled his chances, however, and those close to him suspect he is likely to retire soon.

    1. Shirley-Anne Somerville, Education Secretary
      Somerville could be a dark horse in the race given her relative consistency in office, combined with her anonymity, which would enable her a blank slate to shape the Party’s direction.

    2. Stephen Flynn, Westminster leader
      Flynn is not an ally of Sturgeon and very much an outside candidate; though he may put himself forward.

    3. Mhairi Black, Westminster deputy leader
      Black will no doubt feature in many lists of runners and riders. Though popular with many activists, her lack of government experience and her detachment from the party hierarchy will not count in her favour.

    The PPA is looking into each of the candidates’ track records on media, and will keep our members updated as to any developments.

  • Cabinet reshuffle sees DCMS changes

    Cabinet reshuffle sees DCMS changes

    Lucy Frazer becomes the Secretary of State at the reformed Department for Culture, Media & Sport with ‘Digital’ being relocated to a new Department for Science, Innovation & Technology (DSIT).

    The inclusion of digital in DCMS has long been seen as a misnomer in Westminster, particularly as the UK sought to rewrite policy and regulation following its EU withdrawal. Major policies, including the National Data Strategy and the rollout of broadband will be rehomed in DSIT and will enable the government to be more reflective in its response to the current economic challenges facing Britons. It is expected that the Department for Culture, Media & Sport will keep the Online Safety Bill, but wait to hear how bills covering digital competition and platform regulation will be split across the new departments.

    The new Department for Science, Innovation & Technology (DSIT) will be dedicated to improving public services and growing the economy. Former Culture Secretary, Michelle Donelan, will take on this new department though her initial tenure will be short as she is expected to go on maternity leave next month.

    It is expected that Labour will mirror its own front bench on these changes though Labour has yet to make decisions on appointments.

    Key takeaways

    1. The Online Safety Bill is expected to stay at DCMS and this department remains the sector’s primary sponsor with responsibility for media policy, including press regulation matters and Section 40. The new Secretary of State was sympathetic on S40 in previous conversations and will understand legal arguments owing to her legal career.

    2. The new Department for Science, Innovation & Technology (DSIT) becomes a champion for tech and innovation and could be a barrier to competition reform legislation and bringing into law the promised Digital Markets, Competition and Consumer Bill. The new Secretary of State will understand issues from her time at the DCMS.

    3. There are now three departments with an interest in the Digital Markets, Competition and Consumer Bill and each has stakeholders with different takes and interests.

    4. The PPA awaits clarification on where the Intellectual Property Office (IPOS) will sit.

    5. The PPA will monitor for further new Ministers and divisions of responsibility and will write to the new DCMS Secretary about policy areas concerning our members, including press regulation and competition reform.

    6. The PPA will also write to other relevant new ministers where appropriate and work with industry partners on coordinated activity.
  • DCMS Committee Report echoes PPA calls to empower Digital Markets Unit

    DCMS Committee Report echoes PPA calls to empower Digital Markets Unit

    In its Sustainability of local journalism Report, published on 25th January, the Committee stated it is “glad that the Government appears to be expediting the introduction of the Digital Markets, Competition and Consumer Bill”.

    The Digital Markets Unit aims to rebalance the relationship between big tech platforms and publishers by targeting the root cause of platforms’ market power. In its recommendations, the Committee argued that “clear and explicit provisions for ensuring smaller publishers are fairly renumerated [for use of their content] be included in the Government’s new pro-competition regime”.

    In evidence submitted to the Committee, the PPA had argued: “The Government should anticipate the need to develop additional measures that support smaller, but eligible, media businesses […] The Competition and Market Authority (CMA) and the DMU could also authorise smaller media businesses to engage in collective bargaining under existing competition law before introducing any legislation”.

    The PPA’s evidence also highlighted that any further delays to legislation will negatively impact publishers’ sustainability. The Committee recognised this challenge, noting: “the […] Professional Publishers’ Association highlighted that, in the interim, news publishers would continue to face the difficulties of operating in an unfair market”. The PPA argued to the Committee that large platforms should compensate publishers of special interest news, not only local and national newspapers.

    Evidence presented by the PPA on the impact of rising energy costs was also cited in the Report, with the Committee noting that “recent inflation-driven increases in newsprint costs – as much as 100% for some publishers” have only added to the imperative to rapidly transform business models in the digital age.

    The PPA will continue to engage with the Committee and its work on ensuring the sustainability of UK media businesses.

  • Parliamentary questions highlight the value of specialist publishing to the economy

    Parliamentary questions highlight the value of specialist publishing to the economy

    In reply, Minister Julia Lopez noted that: “The Government greatly values the UK’s publishing sector, of which magazine publishers form a key part. The sector is a UK success story and a significant soft power asset”.  

    She added: “Specialist publishing remains an integral part of the media industry, worth £3.74 billion to the UK economy – employing around 55,000 people. The Government recognises the role that special interest publications play within the UK’s media ecosystem, and the demand for the specialist insights they provide, with more than 40 million adults in the UK reading a magazine every month”. 

    Stafford also asked the Department for Business what assessment the Government has made about the potential impact on the magazine sector if the Universal Service Obligation (USO) – which currently requires Royal Mail to deliver letters six days a week – is lowered to five days. 

    This follows a Westminster Hall debate earlier in January where the impact of a change to the USO on magazine deliveries was noted by the Minister and several MPs. 

    In response to Stafford, Minister Kevin Hollinrake, who is responsible for postal policy, re-stated the Government’s position that there are “no current plans to change the statutory minimum requirements of the universal postal service, set out in the Postal Services Act 2011”.  

    In November 2022, Royal Mail publicly called on Government to remove the statutory requirement to deliver letters on Saturdays. Since then, a range of organisations including the PPA have highlighted the economic harm that this would cause to UK businesses. 

    Even though magazine deliveries are not USO mail, non-USO mail is reliant on and funds the USO network. The PPA has argued that Government must take the importance of non-USO mail into account when assessing the need to retain the USO. 

    The PPA will continue to highlight the immense economic and cultural value of the magazine publishing sector to the UK, as well as engaging with Royal Mail and Government to ensure that publishers are able to continue to deliver subscription mail six days per week. 

  • Minister and MPs acknowledge specialist media industry concerns in debate on Royal Mail USO

    Minister and MPs acknowledge specialist media industry concerns in debate on Royal Mail USO

    In a Westminster Hall debate on Thursday 12th January Kate Osborne MP, who worked for Royal Mail for 25 years, highlighted that she had met the PPA this week to discuss the industry’s concerns. Going on to discuss Royal Mail’s regular citing of the fall in letter volumes as evidence for the need to change the USO, Osborne asked the responsible government Minister to confirm “if the USO is the financial burden it is being portrayed as” given the sharp increase in mailing costs.

    The MP, who has represented Jarrow since 2019, asked Minister Hollinrake to confirm that any further evidence provided to Government by Ofcom will be more thorough than the previous 2020 Review of User Needs. She stated that many letters sent in the UK are non-USO mail [this includes Publishing Mail and the magazines mailed using Downstream Access providers] and that this mail is delivered jointly over the same network as USO mail.

    Osborne went on to observe that non-USO mail includes important time-sensitive information such as letters from hospitals and HMRC, or communications from the police and legal documents, as well as highlighting the importance of time-sensitive magazines. She stated that the 2020 Ofcom Review of User Needs, often cited by Royal Mail – which found that five-day-per-week deliveries would meet 97% of residential and SME user needs – did not properly account for large business users and non-USO mail, and is therefore not a reliable review.

    Seema Malhotra MP, Labour’s Shadow Minister for Business and Consumers (which includes the Postal Services brief) highlighted her party’s concerns about Royal Mail’s request to remove Saturday deliveries, including the importance of “magazine subscriptions where Saturday deliveries form part of those delivery models”.

    Chris Stephens MP, the SNP Spokesperson for Levelling Up, also cited the impact of changes on the publishing industry, including the potential for cancelled subscriptions and lost advertising revenue. Labour MP Matt Rodda, Shadow Minister for Pensions, agreed with points about the delivery of literature, and also discussed the importance of Saturday deliveries for small businesses advertising their services. MPs noted their constituents’ concerns about Royal Mail’s poor quality of service: David Johnston, the Conservative MP representing Wantage, flagged complaints he has received about the slow delivery of magazines as well as missing bank cards and hospital appointment letters.

    Responding to MPs views, the Government Minister attending the debate, Kevin Hollinrake MP, stated that the Government backs the six-day USO but emphasised it is facing challenges. He added that Government has yet to receive a convincing case for a need to change the USO to meet user needs and ensure its sustainability. Further, Hollinrake stated that any representations must first be made to Ofcom and he will then consider any evidence presented by the regulator.

    Hollinrake also agreed that any further analysis by Ofcom must take into account the needs of large business users, specifically citing the impact on magazine publishers. The PPA will continue to engage with Royal Mail, MPs, Government, and Ofcom to ensure that publishers are able to sustain and grow their successful subscription businesses.

  • Key report flags the impact of platforms and regulation in 2023

    Key report flags the impact of platforms and regulation in 2023

    The report, authored by Senior Research Associate Nic Newman, notes that big tech platforms are under pressure due to the economic downturn and the migration of users to platforms such as TikTok. Platforms such as Meta appear to be turning their back on news, whilst emerging platforms appear more disinterested, particularly in hard news.

    Newman goes on to observe that long-standing platforms such as Facebook are focused on how they can respond to the creativity unleashed by TikTok, with Amazon, Apple, and Microsoft likely to focus on growing their advertising businesses. This leaves publishers to concentrate on using new technologies to tailor content whilst still emphasising journalism’s human qualities and track record of delivering trusted information.

    Despite the feeling that platforms may be turning away from news, 33% of publishers told Reuters that they expect to get significant revenue from tech platforms for content licensing (or innovation, a big increase year on year. This reflects the implementation or threat of legislation that aims to ensure publishers can negotiate fairly with large platforms.

    Over half of the publishers surveyed stated that online safety legislation makes them concerned that it will become harder for journalists to publish stories that governments don’t like. It is also observed that privacy-related changes threaten to reduce ad revenue in the short term but are prompting publishers to start initiatives to collect their own (first-party) data that could be the basis for a more sustainable future.

  • UK regulators announce plans for the coming year

    UK regulators announce plans for the coming year

    Ofcom’s key aims include an “internet that we can rely on”, exploring how communications regulation must adapt to digital markets, as well as whether the cloud market – currently dominated by big tech firms – is working well.

    The communications regulator will also aim to support a “media we can trust and value”, supporting the Department for Digital, Culture, Media and Sport with the forthcoming Media Bill. The government has committed to repealing Section 40 in the Media Bill, which if ever activated would leave publishers a choice of signing up to a state-backed regulator, or paying both sides’ costs in legal cases, even if the publisher won the case.

    The work to better regulate the BBC will also continue, including improvements to the BBC competition framework and updates to the Operating License which sets out how the Corporation should fulfil its Mission and Public Purposes.

    Also relevant to publishers is Ofcom’s ongoing work on media plurality, which is exploring solutions to ensure that online intermediaries’ impact on the range of news and information is properly regulated. Suggested solutions include a statutory requirement for platforms to surface a range of trusted sources, as well as user empowerment tools.

    Ofcom continues to regulate the postal market in the UK, and is responsible for holding Royal Mail to account if the company misses its quality of service targets. Reacting to the recent calls by Royal Mail to remove the statutory requirement for the company to deliver letters on Saturdays, Ofcom states that this is a matter for the government but it will provide advice to ministers as and when required.

    The CMA’s responsibilities include investigating breaches of competition law and enforcing consumer protection legislation. The regulator states that its current ambitions are: (a) an environment where consumers are confident of good deals and broad choice of products; (b) that competitive, fair dealing businesses can innovate and thrive; and (c) that the whole UK economy can grow productively and sustainably.

    Of particular relevance to publishers is the CMA’s responsibility as the home of the new Digital Markets Unit (DMU), that will be empowered through the forthcoming Digital Markets, Competition and Consumer Bill. Whilst the legislation will set the broad principles that dominant digital firms should adhere to, the DMU itself will have broad agency to prioritise which digital firms are prioritised for designation under the new laws, and will play a key role in creating firm-specific codes for each individual company.

    The PPA looks forward to continuing its strong and productive relationships with Ofcom and the CMA, ensuring that specialist publishers’ interests are properly accounted for and understood as the regulators carry out their duties.

  • Text and Data Mining copyright exceptions unlikely to go ahead, says Minister

    Text and Data Mining copyright exceptions unlikely to go ahead, says Minister


    The PPA has worked with the Alliance for IP and British Copyright Council to express our concerns that a broad exception for TDM would undermine the UK’s IP framework. The UK publishing industry is reliant on a strong IP framework to invest in quality content. Without the ability to license and receive payment for the use of their data and content, businesses may be compelled to leave the UK market or apply paywalls on content that is currently free to view.


    Speaking to the House of Lords Communications and Digital Committee, the Minister acknowledged that the Intellectual Property Office (IPO) is extending consultation on the issue, and that she is “not convinced of the value of this piece of work”. At DCMS questions last week, Lopez stated the additional consultation will “see if the proposals can be revised”, acknowledging that IP is the “lifeblood” of the creative industries.


    The PPA is engaging with the IPO as it reconsiders the proposals, and will emphasise the need to retain the UK’s gold standard IP framework.