The increasing fusion of technology with the news media landscape, particularly in news writing and content creation, has ushered in a wave of revolutionary changes. As we navigate this era of technological innovation, it is essential to spotlight how African news publishers can forge meaningful partnerships with AI companies, particularly around negotiating compensation for the use of their content, co-developing industry codes of conduct, and building internal capacity to harness new technologies in their work.
AI use in the news media industry introduces new and more efficient methods for news production and content personalisation. But while the opportunities are vast, the risks, especially of job displacement and loss of content control, are equally significant. In this context, African publishers must form strategic alliances with key actors in the technology and AI industries to remain competitive and innovative in the digital age.
|
|
Global precedents already point the way. The Associated Press (AP), for instance, entered into a licensing agreement with OpenAI, granting access to its text archive in exchange for advanced AI tools. Shutterstock, another example, monetised its image and video library while also benefiting from AI enhancements. Similarly, AP, Axel Springer, Le Monde, Prisa Media, and the Financial Times have all secured high-profile licensing agreements with AI companies. Dotdash Meredith recently signed a multi-year deal with OpenAI, which includes content licensing and collaboration on new AI products.
In many of these deals, OpenAI reportedly offers publishers between $1 million and $5 million annually for access to their content archives. While this sum may be modest relative to OpenAI’s financial resources, it poses a barrier for smaller competitors seeking to negotiate similar terms, further cementing OpenAI’s competitive advantage.
|
|
|
|---|
However, not all content owners accept AI training arrangements. The New York Times has sued OpenAI over unsatisfactory licensing terms, while The Intercept and Raw Story have also filed lawsuits for copyright infringement, claiming their content was used without permission. petitioned AI companies for compensation, calling for consent, credit, and fair remuneration in an open letter to leaders of major AI firms.
These cases question whether web-scraped content usage by AI systems is fair use or a copyright violation, which could establish important precedents for the AI industry. OpenAI argues its use falls under fair use and continues using the contested content until a definitive ruling is made. Nevertheless, OpenAI’s CEO, Sam Altman, has recognised creators’ concerns and is committed to finding ways to compensate authors when their content or style is utilised.
Where does African media stand in all of this?
Publisher groups in Indonesia, the US, the UK, and South Africa have refrained from publicly disclosing what they believe Big Tech owes them. In South Africa, the South African National Editors Forum (SANEF), a nonprofit membership organisation, is advocating for the inclusion of small publishers in agreements with Google. Some South Africans support the idea of a journalism fund, though questions remain about who should manage such a fund. Other publishers reject one-time funds, preferring guarantees of future revenue instead. Taiwan, by contrast, has already convinced Google to pledge $9.8 million over three years to support digitisation in Taiwanese media organisations even before formal legislation is in place.
These developments raise the uncomfortable question: while media companies in Europe and elsewhere are negotiating substantial payments, why do African media houses continue to struggle for fair compensation? In countries like Australia, Canada, and France, publishers have actively pushed for compensation, especially when their content is used to train large language models (LLMs). Legal tools such as neighbouring rights are being explored to create frameworks ensuring that media companies are paid when their work is used by tech platforms.
The challenges African publishers face are complex and layered: limited technical capacity, lack of strategic media alliances, inconsistent content quality, poor understanding of content monetisation, and a long erosion of traditional revenue models since the 2010s. In countries like Nigeria, Kenya, and South Africa, media organisations have experimented with alternative revenue structures, including donor-funded and nonprofit models. While these models initially promised editorial independence and public-interest journalism amid dwindling ad revenues, they have also undermined the commercial viability of many outlets.
Technological limitations worsen the challenges faced by African publishers. As Victor Asemota noted, “the truth about our tech in Africa is that we own nothing and host almost nothing.” Poor internet infrastructure and outdated content management systems prevent full integration with platforms like Google, hampering monetisation efforts.
Without cohesive regional coalitions, publishers struggle to demand equitable terms, limiting their bargaining power and knowledge sharing. Strategic alliances among African publishers are essential for collective bargaining, enhancing negotiating power, and unlocking new funding and technology opportunities. By developing actionable frameworks, publishers can position African media to claim their fair share of digital revenues through initiatives like media sustainability funds and coordinated advocacy efforts.
Botswana serves as a live example, as the country is now engaging media development stakeholders to advocate for regional policies inspired by Indonesia’s legislation, which is modelled after Australia’s. These policies would formalise licensing mechanisms and require algorithmic transparency.
The path forward must be underpinned by investment-backed partnerships. Without a coordinated strategy, African publishers will continue to lack the leverage to negotiate fair compensation. Fragmentation will persist, and the gap between local media ecosystems and global tech powerhouses will only widen.
READ ALSO: Zamfara govt partners Oracle to boost digital skills development
Despite the growing trend of newsrooms in Nigeria, Kenya, South Africa, and other African countries shifting towards nonprofit and donor-funded models, this transition has often complicated traditional monetisation strategies. The question remains: what comes next? The Media Development Investment Fund (MDIF) is encouraging newsrooms and media outlets in Africa to prioritise audience engagement, product innovation, and revenue generation. This approach represents a promising path forward in promoting media independence through product-driven revenue.
Many initiatives focused on tech accountability address issues such as labour exploitation, data privacy violations, and concerns about bias and exclusion. Efforts to negotiate compensation from companies that develop LLMs for the media content used in their AI tools seem to predominantly originate from the Global North, suggesting a broader advocacy campaign. However, there is still a lack of accountability regarding compensation for African content. If large tech companies benefit from the assumption that African newsrooms lack agency or are viewed as a “weaker force,” then compensation for the African media industry must be at the centre of the tech and AI accountability discussion.
In order to effectively engage in the global digital landscape, African publishers must promote collaboration across the continent, deepen their understanding of digital content monetisation, and initiate bold policy advocacy campaigns to secure more favourable terms from Big Tech. If these steps are not taken, media houses on the continent risk becoming mere spectators in the AI-driven global information economy.
There is an urgent need for African publishers to be actively involved in negotiations with AI companies that utilise local content to train large language models (LLMs). They must advocate for fair compensation and ensure long-term value from the integration of AI technologies into their content operations. Compensation structures, whether through licensing fees, revenue sharing, or access to advanced tools, should be designed not only to compensate for past contributions but also to invest in the future of African journalism.
