On Friday, Minnesota Public Radio's Midday program will air a discussion about the changes in journalism. Average people who just consume news sat with people in the press who are dedicated to reforming the way it's done.
As the moderator of this forum - I sometimes played devil's advocate.
One woman had just complained that reporters, in their rush to get the story first, sometimes botch it or missed the broader details.
To keep the conversation moving, I said something about how competition has long been a hallmark of the profession. And if you have reporters competing, that forces information out there quicker.
"Isn't that what people want?" I said, playing that contrary role.
Another woman, her name is Elizabeth, said in a baffled tone - "You're not competing against each other. You're competiting for us."
Got it. Oh my, how we've gotten it. People's trust in the press is low. And there are challenges in keeping readers, viewers and listeners in a much more fractured media universe.
Let's get back to that notion of compeition for a second. Understand that journalists have always loved to get the story first, to beat the others in town and strut for the next day. Conversely, you would stew and mutter when a reporter from a competing outlet beat you on a story. You'd vow to get them back.
That competition sizzled the juices. And we truly believed that this competitve environment meant more news getting out to the public. Then came consolidation of broadcast outlets ... and towns that lost all but one newspaper. How our profession lamented the loss of that competition. We'll be sleepy, we thought, we won't be as tenacious.
Then came the Internet and the currency of "the scoop" became devalued. Now you measured you're ability to get things first in hours or minutes rather than days.
And the explosion of media meant news programming had to compete with other forms of content. And there was much more of it out there. The competition didn't go away... but it morphed.
But more importantly, there was the idea that people had felt estranged from their news sources. A colleague of mine, Michael Skoler, likes to talk about a recent Zogby poll that showed roughly two-thirds of the people valued news that helped them with their civic life... but that about the same amount felt they weren't getting that kind of information.
Competition for its own sake wasn't enough. What were we telling people? How did that information enlighten them? Were we helping people to make sense of things?
Maybe these were the new challenges.
What I like about the people in my profession is their tenacity. Oh, yes... we grumble with the best of them. And we can whine. But I'm telling you that the best journalists rise up to challenges. And I'm convinced we are ready to compete for, as Elizabeth put it, you.
The truth is, however, that people in the profession will take different routes to compete.
Some will embrace a philosophy or ideology and champion it.
Some will go for the sizzle of gossip and celebrity coverage.
And some will try to become indispensible civic tools - providing information for an informed community and convening those people by any means at their disposal.
Tim McGuire, a former Star-Tribune editor who now if faculty at the Cronkite School of Journalism, puts it best. He talked about newspapers - but it goes for all forms of the press: "One of the greatest threats to democracy is that our long-tailed world might destroy all sense of community. It should be newspapers that save us from that fracture..."
How about we give that one a try Elizabeth.
rate
email
print
link to this page
Comments: 21
That's one reason why people are tired of the media.
I live in a city where there is one daily newspaper and the same company owns one of the local tv channels. The "independent" papers had to sell to a big company to stay afloat. I don't believe anyone delivers the whole story anymore, just the story they want you to hear.
I think our distrust of media comes from that very sense of urgency and competition you discuss here. After all, anyone can blog these days. There seems to be a chasm between reportage (skilled or unskilled) and journalism. Thirty years ago, I knew that editors had at least attempted to hold a story for fact checking and authenticity before going on air or going to print. Now, as you mention, it's nearly instantaneous. The press (media) has let itself in for this criticism in the rush to compete.
If it were not for Minnesota Democrats Exposed blog, we never would have known about Al Franken's misshaps not paying taxes.
If the traditional mainstream media did their job, there wouldn't be any need for the alternative media's.
Thanks for the article. I enjoyed reading it.