Journalism or Crap?

It is becoming alarmingly clear to me, that the quality of contemporary journalism is being compromised to fill the 24 hour news cycle. The proliferation of new media and the digital landscape are creating more and more space for constant news updates that seem to compromise poignant analysis or reflection. 

I believe it is the analysis and reflection that contributes hugely to a journalist’s skill and the quality of news. SMH online and ABC online news bulletins are commonly resembling something of a twitter or facebook update. While this is absolutely fine in delivering news promptly and concisely, it does little to provoke the critical thinking neurones of the audience.

The 2010 Hung Parliament is indicative of the lack of analytical and reflective journalism occurring today. Politicians act to please the masses by hugging babies or donning hard-hats and instead of analysing the Labor’s policy on the mining tax for example, many publications engaged in commentary about the opportunistic Labor leader appealing to the mining sector for votes or worse still, publishing spin which supports the perspective of the private sector, therefore neglecting to counterbalance the arguments with those from the public sector. The lack of analysis has coincided with a current trend, where the community are quick to support the private sector over the public sector and this wasn’t the case some 20 years ago.

AFR political correspondent Laura Tingle compares the current political landscape to that which dominated the 1980s and 1990s. She speaks of ‘Policy’ ruling the government at that time, but now, it’s ‘Politics’ she confirms.

In July, Tingle wrote a reflective and analytical piece in the Walkley Magazine about the lack of journalistic analysis surrounding the Super Profits Mining Tax policy during the end of Kevin Rudd’s Prime Ministership.

“As a member of the Canberra Press Gallery, which is always being criticised for being too ‘up’ one government or another, or too focused as politics as the game, I was depressed at the way the political end of this story was reported, but truly gobsmacked by the proselytising nature of the copy churned out by mining and business writers.

For example, while the government’s preparedness to ‘consult’ with the mining industry was dismissed as fiction... the industry’s refusal to concede any ground was seen as a perfectly legitimate position. 

Whatever the government’s significant flaws, the mining industry was treated in this debate without the degree of scepticism which might be applied to a rent seeker, and instead with the respect applied to a ‘stakeholder’. And the media did not serve its readers and viewers particularly well.”

The pressure to get the news out there should not override the priority to tell the story.

Can you handle the truth?

Truth and objectivity are values which should be pertinent to journalism, but it seems the doctrine of truth on which journalism was founded is beginning to crumble. It seems the increasing prominence of public relations in the news room may be a cause of this problem.

Most journalists rely heavily on media releases as their source for a story and with the pressure to feed the 24 hour news cycle and meet tighter deadlines, it is no wonder an increasing number of published news stories lack investigation, perspective or even truth. And this is a cause for concern to some.

The problems associated with running press releases verbatim as news is that the role of the PR person is the emphasis a particular perspective, even spinning an issue in a way that gains the journalists attention. In my experience, I’ve seen PR people make up catchy quotes, claiming them as the words of a representative for a company.

It is critical that journalists investigate the many other perspectives surrounding the issue in a press release; failure to exercise objectivity may result in the credibility of the journalist or their news organisation being jeopardised.

Now not all PR is spin, many important stories derive from press releases, and many public relation personnel perform their job ethically. It is simply problematic when journalists do not practice truth-telling and objectivity due to constraints which are arguably beyond their control.

Would things change if the demands of 24 hour news lifted? Probably not according to Nick Davies in his book Flat Earth News. Davies recounts the “horrifying” story of doctors in London selling heroin during the late 1960s. The story went global, and people couldn’t believe that medical practitioners advocating health would sell a “poison” like heroin to addicts.

Davies goes on to detail the controversy that ensued as a result, with Britain and America engaging in a “war against drugs”. The money Governments spent on trying to tackle the black markets selling heroin only exacerbated the number of addicts stealing or prostituting themselves to support their habit. Heroin was becoming such a valuable commodity in the black market that dealers were cutting the drug with other pollutants that harmed heroin-users immeasurably.

What the media never disclosed, or rather bothered to find out, was that the truth is “contrary to popular belief, heroin administered properly is a benign drug” says Davies. People are far more likely to kill themselves overdosing on paracetamol than heroin, and the most notable side effect of correctly administered heroin is constipation. Many successful career people have led long and fruitful lives as heroin addicts were administered the drug by ethically sound, well medical practitioners.

So how’s that for truth and objectivity in journalism?

The Battle of the Sexes

Statement on Equality by Gloria Steinem, WMC Founder and Board Member


The most workable definition of equality for journalists is reversibility. Don't mention her young children unless you would also mention his, or describe her clothes unless you would describe his, or say she's shrill or attractive unless the same adjectives would be applied to a man. Don’t say she's had facial surgery unless you say he dyes his hair or has hair plugs. Don't say she's just out of graduate school but he's a rising star. Don't say she has no professional training but he worked his way up. Don't ask her if she's running as a women's candidate unless you ask him if he's running as a men's candidate; ask both about the gender gap, the women's vote. By extension, don't say someone is a Muslim unless you also identify Christians and Jews, or identify only some people by race, ethnicity or sexuality and not others. However, this does NOT mean being even-handedly positive or negative when only one person or side has done something positive or negative. Equality allows accuracy.

Indeed, we have a female Prime Minister and two female premiers, but where are the leading corporate females of our world?

Today, I looked through the Australian Financial Review - and there was only one woman represented in the newspaper and she was shopping - her face wasn't even recognisable beneathe her mountain of purchases. Not all women are shop-a-holics and nor should they be reduced to an image of one.

Woman make up about half of the Australian population yet this is not the representation in the work force, particularly the corporate work force.

Australia is 23 on the OECD gender gap list... this needs to improve.

We have men as the CEOs of beauty product companies and retailers (of which the majority of customers are women) and as I look around - the majority of accomplished journalists are men.

I appreciate the phisological differences between men and women and even the psychology driving men to reach these milestones in their careers. However, our society is shifting and in all fairness, women should have the option to escape these chauvinistic ways.

As the next generation of journalists, we are in a position to make a change, to accurately represent our society in the media.

Journalism is supposed to be a profession based on truth and accuracy - so all you girls out there, be strong, work hard and do not crumple when your boss asks you if you plan to have family - because I bet you a million dollars, many of those young male journalists will want a family too!

Once we figure this out - let's start working on an equal racial representaion in the media - we are a multicultural society after all...

"Journalists used to question the reason for war and expose abuse of power. Now, like toothless babies, they suckle on the sugary teat of misinformation and poop it into the diaper we call the six o'clock news"

- Kent Brockman, TV newsreader, The Simpsons

Who will pay for newspaper journalism in Western society?

I’ll stress Western Society, because as many of you know, newspaper journalism is flourishing in other parts of the world, namely China, India and South-East Asia.

Unfortunately, this is not a simple question to answer. A number of factors have contributed to the decline of newspapers and subsequently their journalists.

According to journalist Nick Davies, the business model that has sustained newspapers for all these years is now broken.

Amidst the instability of the economic downturn – It came to the attention of many that newspapers are a dying breed. People became frugal with their spending, especially when the internet conveniently hosts a number of news websites for free. Aware of the declining readership, advertisers moved a large portion of their advertising online because it’s cheaper and appeals to more people...this means there’s a lot less money available to pay newspaper journalists for their work.

ABC Journalist Thea Dikeos explains that last year in America, a number of newspapers filed for bankruptcy with the New York Times reporting record losses this promoted a US Senate committee inquiry into the future of journalism.

The concern for me is not that newspapers lack funding, but rather, people are abstaining from buying newspapers containing quality journalism for a quick fix of gossip and infotainment online for free.

According to the Organisation for Economic Cooperation and Development: UK newspaper circulation has fallen by 25% between 2007-09, second only to the US, where the decline was 30%.

In Australia, the decline is not nearly as severe, according to Gavin Atkins it’s about 3%

However, the media and telecommunications industries in Australia are apparently 18-24 months behind the US… suggesting that many Australian newspapers may need to source funding from elsewhere.

Broadsheet newspapers for years were and arguably still are the epitome of quality journalism around the world. The New York Times fellowship is one of the most demanding and competitive journalism traineeships available – all this in a bid to ensure the high standard of their newspaper is not compromised.

And Brendan Hopkins, Chairman of The Newspaper Works believes this is what will keep newspaper journalists in a job – he says: “I think we will see newspapers with us for many years, providing, as ever, we as publishers can keep the quality of our titles.”

 In Australia, the industry body says predictions of the death of newspapers and as such the sacking of quality journalists is premature, citing significant differences between the newspaper market here and overseas.

former Fairfax editor Eric Beecher believes the nation's oldest broadsheets, The Age and the Sydney Morning Herald, are now vulnerable. 

Mike Van Niekerk – the Editor in-chief online for Fairfax believes that diversifying their media will help to sustain them: Fairfax now had radio, video as well as owning classified and dating websites which are bringing in adequate revenue to sustain their newspapers, even if that requires cutting back staff to meet profit margins.

Eric Beecher proposes that the government should subsidise quality journalism for the good of democracy
He says:  “It's much more like the other pillars of our democracy, like the Parliament, or the courts or indeed like the arts and culture, which is actually heavily funded by government. And maybe it has to move in that direction.”

According to David Simon – “We can’t seriously consider publicly funding newspapers. He says High end journalism can and should bite any hand that tries to feed it and it should bite a governing hand most viciously.”

Roy Greenslade who is an online columnist for The Guardian, with 44 years experience as a newspaper journalist, points out something which gives quality newspapers and their journalists hope in the future.

“It will be the big newspapers that report of serious stuff that will survive as it’s a niche market.”  He says this narrow path will be supported by particular advertisements and readers which will help sustain them.

But what about tabloid or even regional newspapers?

Greenslade proposes that Philanthropy may replace the current, deteriorating business model for newspapers.

To give you an example: last year, The Huffington Post  announced the formation of a $1.75 million fund to finance investigative reporting that will be conducted by its staff and freelancers.

The popular web site is collaborating with The Atlantic Philanthropies and other donors to launch the Huffington Post Investigative Fund with an initial budget of $1.75 million. That should be enough for 10 staff journalists who will primarily coordinate stories with freelancers, said Arianna Huffington, co-founder and editor-in-chief of The Huffington Post.

Despite speculation about possible methods of funding which are to replace the traditional business model, one thing seems to be certain during this research, No new model will be able to sustain newspaper journalism on its current scale. The Sydney Morning Herald for example has hundreds of employees, and the philanthropy model supports media teams of 10 or 20. There will, in the future, be less and less jobs for journalists.

Unfortunately, I cannot definitely answer the question of who will pay for journalism. Until new models of funding are put into practice and no longer just speculated about – we will not know for sure who or what will pay for journalism.

Popping my blogging cherry...

I have never written a blog before. To be honest, I don't think I've ever sat down and read someone else's blog either. To me, it seems like another facet of social networking - an excuse for online narcissism in the written form. Who would have thought blogging could be considered journalism? I definitely didn't.

"They are opinionated ranting, often incoherent and frequently biased with little regard for accuracy or balance. They are also compellingly addictive and threatening to emerge as a new brand of journalism." - Journalism.co.uk 

 "But what about people blogging in from overseas? People in war-torn countries reporting on their perspective... I'm sure it is vastly different to that of a paid journalist, that is, providing the journalist is even amidst the action." How poignant? A  fellow student in my International Media Studies tutorial pointed this out to me. It begs the question; How powerful blogs are as an emerging form of journalism?

The following website has some fantastic information about how to successfully blog as a journalist.

http://www.arabmediasociety.com/UserFiles/Ten%20steps%20to%20citizen%20journalism%20online.pdf

Journalist Nick Davies has this to say about citizen journalism...

 "What you haven't got is citizen journalists covering the courts, or the government departments, or the police, or the hospitals, or the schools, or doing investigations. There's a massive swathe of news where citizen journalists can't do the job because they don't have the skills or the time or the resources."

Blogging and citizen journalism, while beneficial to the overall news cycle, should not be the primary form of independent journalism.