Saturday was pretty busy for me. It would have been easier I guess if I got up before 11, but so be it. I played hockey, went to a birthday dinner, and I checked out a couple panels at Media Democracy Day. It was very interesting hearing some of the voices behind the Tyee, the Georgia Straight, The Vancouver Observer and Now Public. One of the speakers unintentionally hit the nail on the head as to why so much alternative media remains fringe media – a feeling that they are at war with a homogenous traditional media.
I’m an avid reader of those newspapers and websites for many reasons. Mainly because I appreciate getting a different perspective, and also because there are some very talented writers working at them. But somehow I am the enemy. I work in community relations. Its not exactly Public Relations, but its close. And on top of that I work within the B.C. Public Service (for the government). According to some of the speakers, I am part of a system that is manufacturing the news. I am the enemy.
Now, I can take the name calling, but it is just one example of the problem that I described. The reliance of major media outlets on news releases written by governments or private companies is a serious threat to the journalistic independence on which the public depends. David Beers from the Tyee was explaining how during a visit to a newsroom, he saw several interns entirely devoted to rewriting news releases. This does not serve the public interest. Most large news organizations are reducing their budgets for news gathering further increasing the problem. But are the journalists really at war with the PR people writing these news releases. No. Are they at war with the companies cutting their news budgets? Not from what I’ve read. Which is very little as newspapers are hesitant to report on themselves. What we have here is a systemic problem with the advertising driven business model to which these companies adhere. The journalists are making an argument for more resources. A legitimate one in my opinion and there is conflict here to be sure, but journalists themselves are not being victimized. They are not laying it all on the line in some battle to the death. They are making an argument.
Alternative media will not be accepted in the mainstream as long as they are portraying themselves as the victims of persecution. Its okay to just make a strong argument. Cut the hyperbole and self aggrandizing.
Back to the News Release, agree with it or not, it is at the moment a necessary evil. And in an ideal situation would never be reprinted as is. A reporter would use it as a launching pad and follow up with at least a half dozen sources before writing something completely different about the topic. This doesn’t happen enough, and thats a shame. But at some point a journalist has to have that news release in front of him and make a decision as to how much time and resources he is going to devote to it. Sloppy journalism can still be an individual failing. There are systemic problems, but if you don’t acknowledge that there are people (overworked people) on your own side who contribute as well, you can’t attack the PR person. Your reliance on them is not their fault. The world is made up of individuals and not archetypes.
Alternative media can have a powerful place in this broken sytem. This us vs. them mentality holds them back. At the moment, alternative media is too often seen as fringe media, only read by people on the far left (or right). This does not always have to be so. There is a crisis of legitimacy at these major media outlets. People do not trust them as completely as they did a few years ago. More and more people suppliment their media diet with online resources, and many are still left cynical. There will always be a place in journalism for opinion (both on the right and the left), but by removing some of it from its news stories the alternative media could act as the more legitimate alternative. A newspaper can come out with one party or another, and even on one side of an issue when it is honest and up front about it. It is historically proven. Moving away from activist pet projects and veiled objectivity (that is fooling no one) might make some honest fringe dwellers unhappy, but could bring media like the Tyee and the Georgia Straight to a much larger audience and fill a gaping void of media that is honest, independent and worthy of support.
I also hung out for the Journalism in New Media. Great talk. I even asked the opening question. But it covered way too much material for such a short lecture. We could have spent the entire time on free community wireless networks and their impact, or on participatory journalism, or even on the stunning lack of policy that exists around new media. Any would have been amazing discussions. Doing them all at once was interesting, but a little disjointed.
But I enjoyed myself all the same… even if I was the bad guy.
1 response so far ↓
David Beers // October 28, 2008 at 2:23 pm
Hi Nick,
Couldn’t agree more with your points. And I think I said some similar things Saturday. I recall pointing out that corporate media breaks many important stories with its talented journalists, resources and large audiences. I also made the case for a spectrum of independent media to broaden the democratic conversation. I think it was Deborah Campbell that spoke of young journalists in corporate newsrooms being asked to work off press releases. I did say we at The Tyee rarely write a story from a press release, although I do agree with your point that a good press release can be a worthy starting point for a well researched article. And we have used press releases in this way more than a few times.
Thanks for the observations. I can assure you that at The Tyee we don’t consider ourselves “victims” of corporate media. We’re have a great time doing the kind of journalism we prefer, and believe we are playing a role in bringing more information and viewpoints to light.
Best wishes. David