Why go into journalism? The industry that employs you is in decline, the on-the-job training is virtually non-existent, the business model is broken, the hours are long, the work involves endless and mindless churning of pregurgitated material, and the pay is lousy. Most of the population rate you just above used car salesmen and now the major media companies are farming off jobs to sweatshops.
Yet people are spending more time with news than ever as the technology that enables the creation, distribution and reception of news grows every more sophisticated. It’s just that no-one can work out how to make money out of it.
A graphic demonstration of the grim plight of the mainstream media that employs journalists is the share price of Fairfax Media, which is one of the worst performing “blue chip” stocks on the Australian sharemarket in recent years, losing about 80 per cent of its value. By the way, News Corp has hardly been a good investment either in recent years, delivering a negative annualised return of 6.1 per cent in the decade till the end of May, 2011. (Source: Bloomberg)
Yet for all the gloom and doom surrounding the media industry, communications and journalism courses continue to turn people away in droves. So clearly the supply-demand equation for new journalistic talent is still tilted in favour of buyers. What’s inspiring these young people to seek to qualify for a craft with apparently little future as a commercial enterprise?
Perhaps one way of thinking of this question is to ponder what would happen if private hospitals and schools stopped being commercially viable. Would we still need doctors and teachers? Of course we would. Just because the business model that underpins commercial media has been destroyed by the internet does not mean that journalism as a calling is any less viable than it might have been 30 to 40 years ago. Indeed, there is a good argument (as I have made elsewhere on this blog) that we need start thinking of civic-minded journalism as a public service.
But for journalists to be able to feed themselves and their families, we are going to need new sorts of entrepreneurs not wedded to traditional distribution models and programming formats. And by this, I don’t just mean the internet. In its annual report on the State of the News Media in America, the Pew Research Center for Excellence in Journalism found the audiences for AM/FM radio have been the most stable of any traditional media in recent years. Given the total saturation of our commercial airwaves by right-wing shockjocks and shouters, it seems hard to believe there is no room for a progressive news-based network in this country. Perhaps Eric Beecher should buy the Fairfax network and fashion a radio version of Crikey?
Another option is to amalgamate many of the mature blogs into a radio/podcast network in which informed commentary on news and public issues can be heard. Modest subscriptions could be charged, alongside commercial sponsorship, to pay for a small team of journalists to run this venture. To this, I can hear former colleagues saying ‘yes, but how are you going to break news with such limited resources’? The answer is that the vast bulk of the ‘news’ in mainstream media now is sourced from press releases and wire services. Most source material (ABS releases, ministerial statements, non-government reports, corporate releases) is available in real-time on the web. To that you add intelligent commentary and analysis. And once you start becoming an influencer, the news often comes to you.
There is no question that if you were starting up a news organisation today, a venture that requires you to print hundreds of thousands of words each day on dead trees and ship them around the country to newsagents, who deliver them to offices and homes, would be the last option on your list. The way we consume news is changing. It is a networked phenonemon. It is interactive and it redefines the professional journalist as someone who curates information, provides useful links and hosts conversations with citizen journalists.
Alongside these trends, our levels of literacy and curiosity about the world are increasing. The magnitude of challenges we face – in climate change, the economy, our political system and public life – demand a level of excellence in journalism that is worth aspiring to. It really is an exciting time if you look at it that way. And THAT may explain why so many young people want to become journalists. A word of advice though kids from the great Jimmy Smith and Dr John. If you’re only it it for the money, don’t bother.
18 Comments
Robert Merkel · June 26, 2011 at 6:27 AM
The obvious right-wing comeback to this might have been “there already is a left-wing radio and TV network – it's called the ABC”.
Whether that's true, it does compete for that listenership, and probably does make the business case harder.
When in-car internet radio is standard and eliminates the licence and transmission costs, it might become a little easier.
Mr D · June 26, 2011 at 6:43 AM
Robert,
I thought of that (the idea that right-wingers would say progressives have got their own network in the ABC).
But I'm afraid the ABC, for the most part, has been nobbled by conservatives in recent years and spends much of its time jumping through hoops for the culture warriors of the right.
I think there is enough of a market (mostly A-B demographic as well) for a cosmopolitan, progressive radio network to make it a commercial proposition.
calyptorhynchus · June 26, 2011 at 7:02 AM
You might also add that since the ABC's classical music channel, Classic Fm, is beneath contempt for the poor quality of the music to plays, there might be a niche for a better classical music/news Fm station.
a cynical old goat · June 26, 2011 at 8:54 AM
Call me a cynical old goat, but I suspect that a lot of the young 'uns queueing up to enrol in journalism courses would be thinking about a career in PR rather than journalism per se. Those media releases won't write themselves, you know!
Anonymous · June 26, 2011 at 12:45 PM
“The answer is that the vast bulk of the 'news' in mainstream media now is sourced from press releases and wire services.”
True, but that's not the news that matters. That stuff is still just as hard to dig up as it has ever been.
“Most source material (ABS releases, ministerial statements, non-government reports, corporate releases) is available in real-time on the web.”
Pity it's not in English or this would be a valid point.
Anonymous · June 26, 2011 at 9:39 PM
Start with some Fairfax radio assets. Engage some of the many people the ABC has purged, during its quest for conservative infotainment. And those they reject, for their ambitions to cover genuine issues.Build a network of researchers and establish a reputable agency, as a byproduct.
Helga Fremlin · June 26, 2011 at 10:52 PM
'But I'm afraid the ABC, for the most part, has been nobbled by conservatives in recent years and spends much of its time jumping through hoops for the culture warriors of the right.'
Is anyone on this comment thread listening to Jon Faine's interview with Julia Gillard? The manner in which this interview (interrogation?) is run proves exactly that what you said in your comment is true, Mr Denmore. I mean – has Jon Faine now joined the ranks of the Liberal Party?? He certainly jumps through Liberal hoops all the time.
Fitzroyalty · June 26, 2011 at 11:09 PM
I just don't believe recovery is possible. We've never paid for news, but rather for the means of distribution to obtain the news (newspapers, radio licences, taxes for the ABC etc).
Now that the content and the means of distribution have been separated, and consumers pay for the means of distribution themselves (buying their own internet access), consumers expect to get the content for free.
Most people simply don't value content enough to pay for it. We may consume content in great quantities, but we mostly do so with a low level of commitment. The TV is on in the background, the paper is flicked through in a cafe.
Mr D · June 26, 2011 at 11:38 PM
Fitzroyalty, you're right, people won't pay for straight news. Indeed, I doubt they'll pay for the specialised variety much either. There are just too many choices out there.
But I think the music industry shows the way forward. Musicians tied themselves to record companies for years and initially saw no way forward when people stopping buying music.
But the companies were just a distribution mechanism. And the more entrepreneurial musos (Lloyd Cole is a good example) created livings for themsleves through their own website, advance copies of recordings, archival material,and of course touring.
That's what I'm suggesting journalists will do. It's actually an opportunity to separate themselves from the constricting, if comfortable, corporate host and spread their wings digitally.
Notus · June 27, 2011 at 2:11 AM
Yes Mr Denmore, I can remember how much sympathy and support journalists gave to workers over the last thirty years of Australian industry restructuring. How they treated with contemptuous mirth for example, workers in the textile, clothing and footwear industry.
Well the boots on the other foot now, so suck it up sunshine and go get a job driving an ore truck.
Anonymous · June 27, 2011 at 5:25 AM
Hi Mr D
Great post again.
I agree re Crikey radio. I also think Crikey TV is quite feasible, once the NBN is built (which is why Rupert was trying to demolish it – and of course because of Foxtel). If you had such a media organisation, it may be that its advertising revenue from these two mediums would cross-subsidise the e-print version.
I also have reservations about the future of subscription-based tv revenue. I believe the NBN will allow high-quality real-time piracy, due to the fast speeds available.
johnny come lately
Anonymous · June 27, 2011 at 10:57 PM
Journalists are supposed to tour? Paul Barry and the Investigative Allstars, live at a venue near you? Don't see lines around the block for tickets to that one…
pk · June 28, 2011 at 6:37 AM
As a current student I'm still pretty skeptical of the fact that none of these revolutions in journalism — online, citizen participation etc — actually result in a stable career path or good wages.
Journalism grads, the new dole-bludging artists? Come to think of it, at least artists can get grants…
Fitzroyalty · June 28, 2011 at 12:16 PM
I'm not sure there is any solution to this problem. I also suspect the answer is to be found not in new media business models but in consumer psychology.
Why do we often prefer to watch a relatively low quality DVD rip .mp4 (approx 800mb) off bitorrent rather than the much better 4gb DVD original of a film? Because the cost/benefit equation does not add up.
The anti-piracy people always make me laugh. They define consumer choice as between paying or not paying for content (consumption is assumed).
I argue that in many cases this is false. The real choice is between free consumption or none (consumption is now longer assumed).
Consumer commitment to content is so low we prefer to go without than to pay.
I can't see many individual entrepreneurial journalists or other independent digital publishers succeeding given these conditions.
Mr D · June 29, 2011 at 1:15 AM
Fitzroyalty, depressing but true. Interestingly, many quality journalists in the US are now moving to not-for-profit ventures such as Pro Publica.
It gets back to what I'm saying in this post of public interest journalism as a public good. Unfortunately, as in public education, we don't value these things till they're gone.
Fitzroyalty · June 29, 2011 at 1:43 AM
This may be surprising given what I have already said but I value what I pay for highly – the ABC. And I would consider voting for any party that committed to funding it better.
Mr D · June 29, 2011 at 3:44 AM
Fitzroyalty, I'm afraid the ABC has become nobbled after the Howard years of board-stacking and its targeting by culture warriors.
It really does need a hands-off board whose role is to advocate for it to politicians and ensure it plays a role as public broadcaster with a rigorously independent editorial function.
I get the impression the ABC these days is always looking over its shoulder, which doesn't help journalists do their job without fear or favour.
Mr Crapulent · July 10, 2011 at 4:21 AM
The decentralised commercial news that you fancy may be a vast improvement on traditional monopolised media but the problem of corporate influence over content and analysis remains.
What we need is new ways to publicly fund the news and the distribution network in a way that prevents government control. There are plenty of ideas that have been suggested in the last hundred or so year to democratise the press and fund journalism (as one of the most vital public goods). It is time to dust a few off and see where they can take us.
The ABC has its merits but the idea that news should be balanced is terrible (it should be honest and accurate and thought provoking and challenging) and the way that balance is construed (hearing the two most powerful sides to a story) makes it rediculous.