News from somewhere
Sometimes thinking can get in the way of action. I drove past the offices of our local newspaper yesterday and passed a picket line of newspaper staff who are striking over compulsory redundancies. I was invited to beep my horn in support. My hand hovered over the steering wheel and by the time I'd made up my mind I'd turned the corner.
I paused because I don't buy their newspaper any more. With the exception of a handful of excellent journalists, their coverage of local news just winds me up – a mix of local hero does something and thus deserves an MBE/local people react against something and we support them/your local community is going to hell in a handcart and all is gloom/and local business sends us some spin and we just reproduce it.
My journalist friend will tell me that it's all management's fault, and that they should take less profit out of the business, instead of making people redundant. He's probably not wrong, but I don't think he's completely right either. Figures out yesterday show that their paper's circulation is down 12% on last year – reflecting what's happening in much of the local newspaper industry. Local TV and Radio isn't faring any better. This all has profound implications for those of us who want to create some local change.
When it comes to social action, I've been schooled in the thinking of Paulo Freire – the Brazilian thinker who recognised that for people to act, they need to be made aware of what's going on around them - he calls it conscientisation (it sounds better in portuguese – but basically means becoming conscious of what's going on around you). One way to find out what's going on is through your local media. But what if your local media's reporting of what's going on isn't very good?
I remember reading a while back that the future of news – particularly online – is super-local. You don't need to be a futurologist to work out that local newspapers in their current format are on their way out. The internet, falling advertising sales, citizen journalism, and, I'm sure, management by newspaper groups who don't understand local circumstances all play their part. That's why I was interested to hear Matthew Taylor talking the other night about his enthusiasm for community websites – and the RSA's desire to support them more.
You can see some good examples of community websites here. Matthew's interest was in their potential for organising local people into doing things like buying food at wholesale prices. I think that's good – I also think there's a lot of potential for local news sharing too.
I can fully see why anyone would protest in order to save their (or their colleague's) livelihoods, and perhaps I need to start showing a bit more solidarity with my fellow human beings. But I am also clear that no industry has a divine right to survive, and as things stand, local newspapers are on their way out because they're no longer relevant enough. Maybe if local newspapers took co-production a bit more seriously – involving local people beyond the letters page – they may find that they have a future.
The politics of us an them is just too easy! Easy to blame management because it stops us looking at out part in the problem. also easy to blame the workers – change resistant etc.
Both stances come from a basic belief that we are dependent rather than autonomous. Signs of bureacracy overwhelming entrepreneurialism. Individualism beating collectivism.
Interesting, I needed to adverttise some VCS jobs a couple of years ago at that time we discovered it was cheaper to advertise them in the Guardian than the paper in question, now most of those jobs are advertised on email bulletins or free websites
Nice post Rob. I share your ambivalence about the problems of traditional print media. This piece by Roger Parry the long standing chairman of a regional newspaper group captures the scale of the problem http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/19aa59c2-0437-11de-845b-000077b07658.html?nclick_check=1. There s a public interest n supporting good community web sites which should combine news and comment with community initiatives – this is the aim we have in mind n seeking to work with William Perrin.
Thanks for the link Matthew – really interesting article – particularly as it’s written by the chairman of the group who own the local paper I’m referring to. Fascinating to see someone who I’ve indirectly criticised above espousing some of the same progressive ideas – such as citizen journalism. I’d be interested to know how much of that is getting translated into action on the ground.
Rob many thanks for the link to lists of community websites. It’s uplifting and motivating to see-it-for-real when community activists do something as skilled and edgy as this.
Thanks Edward – yes it’s good to see isn’t it? Glad I’ve been useful.
“But what if your local media’s reporting of what’s going on isn’t very good?”
This is the wrong question. We need to be asking, what makes local media reporting good?
There are, of course, lots of factors. Such as having a well-trained, well-resourced, diverse team of reporters, free to move more than three feet from their desks to pursue the stories that matter to the communities they serve.
Reporters need to be backed by knowledgeable and experienced news editors; we need photographers out on the streets; designers laying out attractive, engaging pages; subs; more subs; and a few more to do some more checking and chivvying.
The over-riding negative factor in recent years has been the relentless drive by media companies to cut back on all of the above in an unsustainable attempt to sustain profit margins of 20-30%.
This has meant journalists simply have less time to do the job they want to do (and believe me, whatever you think of the YP, its journalists love working there and want to be able to do a better job for you).
Across the country, reporters’ requests to leave the office to meet contacts and interview sources are being refused because desks don’t have enough staff, and papers are just not sending reporters to court like they used to.
Instead, reporters are forced to rely more and more on press releases and PR output. Consider the implications for democratic involvement and accountability when council meetings and their committees are covered by accurately reporting what it says in the council’s press release the next day.
The growth of online news, the decline in advertising and the recession are after-the-fact events.
The root problem lies in the failed business model that Johnston et al have pushed to its limits in times of an economic boom.
Your journalist friend is right, it’s not the journalists’ fault. And the next time you pass their picket line, you should toot.
Or, better still, jump out of your car and drop a few quid in their collection bucket.
Because if you save their jobs today, they’ll be around to report your city’s news tomorrow.
Thanks for the comment. There’s not a lot there that I’d disagree with – and it’s useful to get a view from the inside. However I don’t think it’s just a question of economics and business models. I think there’s an equally important issue in that the way people gather and share news has changed, and in my opinion local print media has failed to adapt to changing expectations.
I don’t doubt that part of your decline in sales and income is due to cutbacks which mean that journalists have to rely on press releases (as I mentioned above that’s one of the main reasons I don’t read your paper any more). But I’m not convinced that more time and resources would necessarily make the difference. Your model is still of the professional gathering news from the people. I question whether that is the right model for a lot of local (and super-local) news sharing these days.
I would suggest that you keep people like me at arms-length because you see us as a threat. I’d argue that you need to work with us to make your local news-gathering better. Maybe you’d do that with more resources – I have to say I’m not convinced.
Citizen journalism, blogs and the like aren’t the answer on their own. But print isn’t either. The commenter on your blog wants a debate about the future of local news – I’d welcome that too – we both agree as to the vital importance of local news. Where we perhaps disagree is about the role of local print media in that future.
“I would suggest that you keep people like me at arms-length because you see us as a threat.”
This is something we regularly hear and yet no-one has ever come up with any evidence on this. Some bloggers seem to see commenting on blogs with an alternative argument to be a hostile act (the undiplomatic language of some of our members aside).
On the contrary, we are trying our best to engage on blogs, to have a debate, to put our point of view and seek to create a level of understanding of where we come from.
To underline this issue, I’d like to invite you and any other bloggers who wish to engage with the NUJ on these very issues to join our New Media mailing list – http://mailman.journonet.co.uk/mailman/listinfo/newmedia – where we discuss how new media and the changes its bringing to the media are dealt with by the NUJ.
Donnacha DeLong, NUJ National Executive member for new media.
Thanks for the comment. My evidence is this – where’s the engagement with local bloggers in my local paper – or on its website? I welcome and encourage comments – and compared to most blogs with my level of readership I get – and respond to – a lot of comments. For the record – 268 posts – 431 comments. Some people may react with hostility – I don’t think I do.
I’ll have a look at that link, thanks.
Rob
Just to clarify, I don’t work for the YP. I represent NUJ Left, the lefties in the union.
You’re right, we agree to an extent. You’re arguing for greater involvement of communities in the gathering and delivery of local news – which don’t forget isn’t confined to print these days (even though regional media companies have been quick to have a web presence but slow to resource them properly, meaning often regional and local papers do online news quite poorly at the moment, but that’s another thread). And so am I.
You say this can be achieved by making more use of ‘citizen journalists’ and bloggers. I’d say you’re falling into the bosses’ trap of thinking ‘citizen journalism’ is a new phenomena. We’ve always had citizen journalists; we used to call them eyewitnesses and sources. It’s just that nowadays they have camera phones, digital cameras and laptops.
Nothing wrong with that at all. The more channels for newsgathering that there are, the better. And, as far as NUJ Left is concerned, the more independent media that exist to counter the weight of the capitalist press, the better.
But, I’m afraid, you’ll still need journalists in this new age. And any citizen who works as a journalist, rather than simply acting as an eyewitnesses or a source, is a journalist.
Professional journalism isn’t an optional extra which would be nice to have if we could only afford to pay for it. It’s vital to the flow of information through society.
It ensures that ‘facts’ and opinions are checked, balanced against other ‘facts’ and opinions, rebutted and reported accurately and fairly.
Journalists don’t fear eyewitnesses and sources, we love them. However we recognise that eyewitnesses and sources often see things from one point of view.
I would prefer journalists to have more control over the news they produce because the capitalist model of ownership has failed journalists and readers.
The problem with having faith in ‘citizen journalism’ is that it’s being framed on the bosses’ terms.
It allows them to cut jobs and close local newspaper offices under the guise of ‘democratising’ news production.
It’s obviously a nonsense to suggest (not that I’m saying you suggested it) that Northcliffe or Johnston or Newsquest have the interests of a community at heart when they cut journalists’ jobs and close the local office because citizens are now so adept at newsgathering that they can do it for themselves.
I’d also add, just to develop the point about local newspaper websites, that many now do allow readers to have their own blogs on their websites, as well as host chat forums and allow comments on news stories etc. Newsquest has been doing it more over the last few years, but as I said above it’s been slow to resource its sites properly.
Thanks – and yes, as I posted the comment I realised that you weren’t from the YP.
Once again, I agree with a lot of what you’re saying there. I’d be interested to know more about how the companies running papers are viewing citizen journalism – I’ve seen the piece in the FT linked to above but don’t know more. If you can point me to something please do.
If “citizen journalism” is being used as a way to usher through redundancies, then I wouldn’t agree with that. I agree that we need skilled, well-resourced journalists as well as amateurs like me.
Having this debate helps me to understand where you’re coming from – that you too fear a future where the last few journalists left are just churning out PR and hearsay. But again, I suppose I want to hear more from the unions about their vision for the future. The main thing I hear – and maybe this is unfair – is that you want to protect jobs. And then I hear things about how bad things will be without you. I don’t hear about how things could be different with you. Again, please use the blog to point me to your vision for a different future – I’m probably as unenthusiastic about distant media conglomerates as you are.
I’m not ducking out of an argument here – but I also don’t want to polarise it. I think my initial piece tried to get across the point that I wasn’t sure whether I support the strikers or not. I’m still not sure, and at the moment I don’t think I do. It would be a lot easier to just beep my horn and get on with my life, but I don’t actually think that solves anything.
I will answer some of the other questions when I have more time. but I’m curious why you think you don’t support workers taking action against their colleagues being sacked.
If it helps you to decide, here’s some context about who in your city values the provision of quality local news:
On the first day of the YP strike, Peter Lazenby, one of the journalists’ reps, told BBC Look North (something along the lines of): “We’re proud of our papers and we’re proud of the campaigns we do, we want to be able to carry on doing on our jobs without the threat of being made redundant.”
Johnston didn’t put anyone up to speak, but issued a statement saying: “We’re surprised more people didn’t want to leave when we offered redundancy.”
Sorry, I didn’t mean “I will answer some of the other questions when I have more time” to come across as snippily as it does. I just meant, I’ll have to do it later when I have more time. Don’t want to be accused of being an NUJ belligerent!
I support people’s right to take that action. What I’m not sure I support is the wider stance of the unions on issues like this. It’s back to my previous point (and I understand that you don’t have time now!) I want to hear what their vision is for a different way for local news. Once I hear that I’ll know whether I actively support this particular campaign. As it is I see an industry which is losing relevance, and I don’t hear (yet) what the Unions will do about it – other than protect jobs. By the way I know Pete and think he’s an excellent journalist and more importantly a very good man. I don’t feel comfortable disagreeing with him on this as I respect him a lot, but I do think differently on this issue.
The NUJ wants local media to be part of the community, with enough journalists to research stories, attend council meetings, attend local courts, interview people on all sides of a story. We want newspapers with subs to make stories readable for the audience they’re written for. We want training for journalists so they can do new media well and produce quality material for the audience.
Some of these things bloggers and “citizen” (are professional journalists not citizens?) journalists can do – but few of them fulltime. Who wants to spend all their spare time in council meetings and courts? This is the kind of thing you’ll only do if you’re paid – it’s bloody boring and, most of the time, there’s no real story in it.
The problems you’ve identified with the media currently are because the cuts in the media over the past few years have undermined all this. There aren’t enough journalists to cover courts or councils – letting important issues slip away unnoticed – there aren’t enough journalists to interview everyone or research interesting stories. There isn’t enough money invested in training, so new media developments on local newspapers haven’t been very good.
Thanks Donnacha, that’s useful to get some more background. Clearly we need both professional journalists and “citizen journalists”. I’d be interested to know if there are any newspapers that are effectively using both – in a way that professional journalists are happy with.
One of the other key problems with the idea of citizen journalists is in relation to the law. To become a journalist, you need to go through a lot of training, including several exams on the law as it applies to journalism. What the big bosses don’t seem to appreciate is that a citizen journalist will have no idea of the intricacies of exactly what can or can’t be printed in advance of a court hearing, or what might be defamatory, or the implications of which details you include in a report of someone being arrested for molesting their eight-year-old niece, for example.
Citizen journalists are of enormous use – any paid journalist loves to have a list of people they know they can get in touch with for information on a given subject, and the e-mail that comes in saying “I was passing the town hall and got this picture of the Mayor being taken away by the police” is absolutely invaluable. But, as other comments have said, there needs to be someone properly trained to compile it all, to know what can and can’t be printed and to write it up in a readable, engaging way.
Again, the big bosses don’t fully understand what they’re saying when they talk about citizwn journalists being the future. As much as they are our eyes and ears when we can’t be everywhere at once, some of the information sent to us is barely understandable because the person who has sent it is borderline illiterate. That’s nothing against them – as I say, they’re invaluable, and everyone has different skills and different things they find difficult – but you can’t simply reproduce whatever is sent in. No matter what you think of your own local paper, it would certainly be of poorer quality if it relied purely on citizen journalists.
“I’d be interested to know if there are any newspapers that are effectively using both”
In short, all do. I’d reiterate that the phrase ‘citizen journalist’ really is a bit of a red herring. In terms of providing content for established/traditional (whatever you want to call it) media, we should be talking about eyewitnesses and sources, and discussing the new and interesting ways that they are now able to get material and information to us.
As Tiger points out, any citizen who takes a pic of the mayor being arrested is, and always was, worth their weight in gold. But it’s a far cry from this to that happy snapper having the time, inclination and skill to properly research, write, design, edit, check, check and check again the story that goes with that picture.
Any citizen, or group of citizens, can establish themselves as news providers if they choose – and, as I said above, I would welcome it – but I can’t see this being in any way effective or diverse enough at the moment to negate the need for well-resourced, well-staffed and well-trained journalists.
And this is the core point, to drag us back to your post. You should support the YP strikers. Firstly, because they’ve asked for your support in their campaign against a rapacious, belligerent, shortsighted company which is proposing to sack journalists simply because its execs are shortsighted, irresponsible and greedy, and any reasonable human being can see that this is a just cause.
But secondly, and more importantly, they are campaigning for the right of the community to have access to independent, diverse and critical media. Regardless of whether you think “newspapers” will be around in the future, the battle being fought in Leeds is between quality journalism (in whatever format) and corporate greed. If the bosses win this one, do you think bloggers and ‘citizen journalists’ will successfully and effectively plug the gap? I don’t. Because the corporations won’t allow it.
On the use of bloggers in trad media, some local media groups are trying in a hamfisted way to do this – see http://www.newsshopper.co.uk, a pretty standard example of a Newsquest site (this one’s my local paper). Its ‘Your say’ secion includes forums and blogs for readers. There’s a certain amount of crossover in that stories and issues in the paper (print and online) get picked up on the blogs and vice versa.
In my opinion, Newsquest doesn’t put enough behind this in terms of staff and resources because all this “user-generated content” still needs people to receive and handle it. Another point to note, when you’re a semi-regular reader of the stories and posts like I am, you realise how small the constituency of users is at the moment. Really just a handful of people.
I should add that, contrary to popular belief in some quarters, digital cameras are not “a great leveller”. A shit picture on a digital camera is still a shit picture.
It’s just that you get to find out quicker whether it’s a shit picture or not.
It also means it’s easier to email your shit picture to someone. Like a newsdesk.
Which means it’s easier for shortsighted, greedy news executives to reach the conclusion that if people are sending in their own pictures they can put them in the paper and sack their professional photographers.
So they save money but the quality of pictures in the paper nosedives. So they lose revenue because some people stop buying the paper and advertisers start to realise that they don’t want to place their ads next to shit pictures in a newspaper with dwindling sales.
So they lose more revenue and, becausse it wouldn’t do for shareholders to have to lose out, they decide to sack a couple of reporters and a few subs. And the quality of reporting and layout nosedives, and spelling mistakes and legal errors increase.
So more people stop buying the paper and advertisers think maybe they don’t want to place their ads in a paper known to carry garbage and legally-dubious stories.
So, no, I don’t think digital cameras are a great leveller.
And I think if Joe and Joanne Public want to go around with their digital cameras taking pictures, that’s fine. And if they want to publish them anywhere, that’s also fine. And if they want to send them to their local newsdesks if they think they’ve got a shot they might be interested in, that’s also fine.
As long as there are professionals the other end who can judge the merits of the photograph on professional and legal standards, based on skill and experience, to decide whether to publish it or whether to ask professional photographers to get some other pictures to put on the pages instead.
Also…sorry…just to try to directly tackle a point you raised that you might realise I touched on, because it all ties in with what I’ve been saying about resources and staffing.
When you say – “I see an industry which is losing relevance, and I don’t hear (yet) what the Unions will do about it – other than protect jobs. By the way I know Pete and think he’s an excellent journalist and more importantly a very good man” – you answer your own query.
As Donnacha and I have suggested, the union is doing more than ‘protecting jobs’ – we’re looking at alternative models of ownership, engaging with changes in media production, analysing how these will shape the media industry in the future, while at the same time fighting to preserve quality, diverse and critical media etc – but what’s wrong with protecting jobs, especially when the jobs are those of excellent journalists and very good men and women?
Thanks for all the comments. I suppose I’d be keen to round this up by concentrating on what we agree on, and agreeing to disagree on the other stuff. The debate has been really useful to me and has helped me to change my perspective a fair bit. The things you’ve pointed me to have highlighted the negative impact of big companies like JP taking out far too much profit – and as you say, reacting in the only way they know – cutting costs. That is clearly taking us nowhere – and I appreciate more now what you’re fighting for – alongside your jobs.
I don’t think I’ve ever thought that “citizen journalists” (points taken) and bloggers can replace professional journalists. However, again, you’ve made it clearer to me that the owners of papers like the YP seem to be viewing citizen journalism as a way forward for their papers. Clearly, without enough professionals to work with bloggers et al, this would be ridiculous. But I’d also still like to challenge you on how open you are as a profession to working with people like me. I’m talking from experience here – I write a lot about business – and, of course, get in touch with my local business journalists from time to time offering ideas for pieces etc. Do I get as much as an email in return? No, because you’re all too busy. Aren’t we all! I still think a change of culture is needed there. I don’t expect you to publish every tom dick and harriet, but if there’s someone local who writes regularly and by all accounts well, then use them more.
On the jobs issue, yes, of course people should do what they can to protect their jobs. My challenge to you would be that you perhaps need to get better at getting the other stuff across. I think I’m fairly engaged with news, and most of what I hear (admittedly we all hear what we want to hear) is about saving jobs. I haven’t heard enough about the other issues – the value of quality media for a community – and the impact of current practices. Maybe the way that’s put across needs to be adapted better for a general public who aren’t all as politically engaged as you and your members.
The reason I want to draw the debate to a close is that we all have big battles to fight. I don’t regret writing the piece, but I do regret the fact that it’s diverted all of us from doing what we all want to do – fighting for a more socially just world. I think we need to concentrate on that more – and accept that we each have different ways to do it. I’m not anti-union, but I also (personally) haven’t chosen that route to create change. My thing is social entrepreneurship – trying to find ways to run businesses that make society better. I need to accept that even though I don’t agree with your approach all the time, I should respect more your right to act as you do – and understand why you act that way – given the business environment you’re working in. And given all that, yes, I should show more solidarity with my fellow human beings, even if I don’t necessarily think that “their way” would be “my way” to create change. So, given that this debate has been public and your challenge to me was public, I want to tell you that I have now thrown some money in the bucket – and I hope you manage to improve things in Leeds and elsewhere.
Rob
Rob, thanks very much for that. It’s been a very useful discussion for me as well – sorry to hide behind the NUJ Left pseudonym, I know it’s a bit annoying, but I was at work when I first commented and I should really have been working for my employer rather than my union!
I (and others in the NUJ you’ll be glad to know) think the union has a lot to learn from people outside its normal ambit – the comfort zone for a lot of us, let’s be honest – and it’s a shame that in the past we probably haven’t been very good at engaging, and have often left people with the wrong impression. Which is what is so good about mediums like this, we can see what each other are up to and swap ideas.
I don’t know what to say about how to get the press interested in stories, other than keep trying. If the reporters aren’t getting back to you it might be that they’re busy, or it might be how you pitch your ideas. If you’re sending ‘ready-made’ articles they’re possibly less likely to respond because their desks are likely to be strict about freelance budgets and usage etc. Remember, the coal-face hacks in most, even modestly-sized, newsrooms have very little autonomy or control over how the paper is put together.
I don’t know how you approach it, but try just offering them a morsel, something they can follow up with you. A quick email or call saying, ‘did you know that the furniture repair shop at the end of Johnson Street is run by a workers’ co-op set up with a government start-up grant? I’ve got more if you want and can put you in touch with another co-op in Elmet…’
Anyway, I’m absolutely delighted that you’ve dropped some cash in their bucket, it really does mean a lot to them. And I’m not hyping that. Every £1 is a lifeline because it represents thought, attention and solidarity. And that (as well as food parcels!) will keep them going.
Thanks again. I’ll be back sometime, perhaps my own time…
[...] In fact, I got into quite a big debate with a local NUJ official (see the comments section) when I blogged about not showing my support for striking Yorkshire Evening Post journalists. Guardian Leeds has, for me, filled an important gap. In short, it’s given me news and [...]