South African Competition Commission Deputy Commissioner James Hodge and journalist and media manager Paula Fray discussed the impact of digital platforms on the media market in an interview with the Daily Maverick.
Digital platforms have had a profound and detrimental impact on the freedom and sustainability of South African media, according to preliminary findings from the South African Competition Commission’s Media and Digital Platforms Market Inquiry (MDPMI). The Commission is preparing to finalize its report into the influence of Big Tech on the country’s media industry, warning that unchecked platform dominance threatens not only the news ecosystem but also the foundations of democracy itself.
The MDPMI, chaired by James Hodge and with media expert Paula Fray as a panelist, found that digital platforms — especially search engines and social media companies — have severely undermined the financial viability of traditional media outlets. The inquiry revealed a dramatic shift in advertising revenue, with digital platforms now capturing the lion’s share of the market, diverting between R300 million and R500 million annually from news organizations.
This disruption has led to a halving of newsroom staff, increased casualization and juniorisation of journalists, closure of regional bureaus, and reduced coverage of rural and smaller urban areas. The consequences are clear: South Africa’s media is struggling to fulfill its democratic mandate to inform the public and hold power to account.
"Platforms are keeping users within their ecosystems, cutting off click-throughs to news websites," said Hodge. "This undermines monetisation opportunities and creates a value imbalance."
Search vs. Social: Different Roles, Similar Remedies
The Commission’s findings distinguish between the roles of search engines like Google and social media platforms like Meta* and TikTok. While both are implicated in weakening the media landscape, their mechanisms differ. Search engines extract value by using news content to respond to user queries, while social media platforms have the power to suppress news entirely by altering algorithmic feeds.
The Commission recommends that Google compensate South African media houses up to R500 million per year for three years — a bold move based on evidence gathered through the inquiry’s investigatory powers. If platforms fail to cooperate, the Commission has proposed introducing a 10% digital tax on platform revenues in South Africa.
"This is not simply about reparations. It’s about restructuring the market to ensure fairer value distribution and increased referral traffic to news outlets,"
explained Hodge.
Media Freedom: A Pillar of Democracy
The MDPMI underscores that media freedom is not just a journalistic issue—it’s a constitutional imperative. The South African Constitution enshrines the right to freedom of expression, and the inquiry links media decline directly to constitutional harm. Without robust, independent journalism, the public loses access to reliable information, especially in rural and underserved areas.
"In a world where anyone can publish online, professional journalism’s value is sometimes overlooked," said Fray. "But citizen content isn’t a substitute for verified, ethical reporting. Platforms amplify sensationalism, not substance."
Towards a Balanced Digital Media Ecosystem
The Commission has taken a nuanced approach in its interim recommendations. For video-sharing platforms like YouTube, the focus is on fair revenue-sharing models, while feed-based social platforms are urged to stop deprioritizing news content and restore visibility for quality journalism.
Hodge emphasized that the Commission's approach aims to create a sustainable, win-win solution for both platforms and media organizations:
"We’re not trying to turn back time. We understand the digital shift. But we need to fix the structural imbalances that prevent fair competition."
South Africa as a Model for Global Reform?
The Commission’s recommendations diverge from models adopted in other countries by aiming to fix referral traffic flows and restore market fairness rather than enforce indefinite monetary transfers. Regulators globally, including in Australia and the EU, are watching closely. The inquiry’s findings may serve as a pilot model for rebalancing power in digital media markets.
"Big Tech’s influence extends globally, but it has specific local effects. In South Africa, the impact is compounded by inequality and fragile media infrastructure," said Fray. "Our democracy depends on diverse, independent voices. This inquiry is about safeguarding them."
As the Commission moves towards finalizing its report, the optimal outcome remains clear: a fair and functional media ecosystem where platforms and publishers coexist sustainably, and citizens have access to reliable, diverse information.
In a time when digital misinformation is rampant and platform power is largely unregulated, the South African inquiry stands out for placing democracy and constitutional rights at the heart of its economic analysis. Whether Big Tech will engage in meaningful reform — or face regulatory penalties — remains to be seen.
*banned and designated as extremist in Russia
Source: Daily Maverick
