Future Media w/ Ricky Sutton and Chapell

Denmark may be famous for Lego, Ozempic, and a Bluetooth named after a Viking king — but its next export could be a new model for media power in the AI era. It’s rallied 99 per cent of the country’s publishers and broadcasters into a collective licensing body designed to negotiate with Big Tech, and the result is already looking less like Scandinavian hygge and more like a Viking bloodbath.
At the centre is Karen Rønde - a judge, former MP, journalist and ex-Netflix policy lead - now running the DPCMO, Denmark’s collective spearhead for publisher rights. Google has signed up but is stalling on price, Apple's been reported to the cops, Meta and TikTok face enormous fines, and OpenAI and LinkedIn are headed for court. Karen joins Chris Duncan and me to explain what Denmark is building - and why the chaos is part of the strategy.
See Privacy Policy at https://art19.com/privacy and California Privacy Notice at https://art19.com/privacy#do-not-sell-my-info.

South Africa just announced the most intriguing deal I’ve seen yet for tech platforms to support premium publishers. It follows Australia deals in Canada, Europe, the UK, Denmark and a growing list of others testing multi-year, multi-million-dollar arrangements, and at first glance, the package looks familiar: Money for content.
But then it turns into new territory. Google has agreed to let users customise Search to prioritise preferred South African news sources, and to give publishers stronger levers to opt out of AI training and AI products.
Most striking though is Google’s own framing. It used its official blog to say supporting local media a shared responsibility and urged other tech firms to follow.
I’m joined by James Hodge, chief economist at South Africa’s Competition Commission who chaired the inquiry, and Paula Fray, the inquiry’s media expert, to unpack how the deal was done, and whether it can actually shift the media-tech landscape.
See Privacy Policy at https://art19.com/privacy and California Privacy Notice at https://art19.com/privacy#do-not-sell-my-info.

Bouncing around LinkedIn the other day I stumbled on a post by one of the smartest people I know. Stuart Forrest runs audience development for global media group Bauer, and he was pondering the future of search.
He made a strong argument that AI Overviews - and its big brother AI Mode - can’t be Google's end game because it kills its US$198 billion search ads cash cow.
Instead, his money’s on a beta project about to emerge from Google Labs. He joins me today to talk about it.
See Privacy Policy at https://art19.com/privacy and California Privacy Notice at https://art19.com/privacy#do-not-sell-my-info.

Two former Meta leaders are breaking their silence on Australia’s world-first under-16s social media ban. The law is just weeks old, and we’ve heard plenty from government, parents and kids - but less from the people who understand, from the inside, how Meta thinks about safety, incentives, and enforcement.
My guests are a former Meta director Kelly Stonelake who worked on Mark Zuckerberg’s metaverse before raising concerns about child harms and later being laid off. She now advocates for child safety and tech regulation, advises the US Federal Trade Commission, and publishes the Substack Overturned.
I’m also joined by Brian Boland, Meta’s former Vice President of ads and marketing, who has advised governments and testified to the US Senate that platforms prioritise growth over safety.

We recorded the day after the terror attack on Australia's Bondi Beach, leading to violent footage flooding social media. I wanted to know whether society rely on tech companies to self-regulate, or will it take laws like Australia’s to force change?
See Privacy Policy at https://art19.com/privacy and California Privacy Notice at https://art19.com/privacy#do-not-sell-my-info.

Last year, Google pulled a move only a trillion-dollar giant would try. It literally wrote the US government a cashier’s cheque for a little over $2 million so it could dodge a jury in the Justice Department’s ad-tech monopoly case and face a judge alone.
By paying the damages the DOJ said it was owed, Google turned the whole thing into a bench trial in Virginia - no unpredictable jurors, just one judge.
It looked clever at the time, but it’s now turning into a long-term headache. That ruling, and the cheque behind it, are ammunition for a growing line-up of publishers, advertisers, and ad-tech rivals now chasing Google for potentially tens of billions in damages.
Joshua Hafenbrack, a Justice Department trial lawyer on the Google search monopoly case, joins us to explain why he thinks that strategy created what he calls “a devastating long-term risk”.
See Privacy Policy at https://art19.com/privacy and California Privacy Notice at https://art19.com/privacy#do-not-sell-my-info.