Newspapers: The future of journalism

Part 1: Clay Shirky lecture

Go to the Nieman Lab webpage (part of Harvard university) and watch the video of Clay Shirky presenting to Harvard students. The video is also available on YouTube below but the Nieman Lab website has a written transcript of everything Shirky says. 

 1) Why does Clay Shirky argue that 'accountability journalism' is so important and what example does he give of this?

Clay Shirky argues that accountability journalism is vital because it holds power to account, ensuring that institutions, governments, and corporations are transparent and act in the public interest. He believes that this kind of journalism is essential for the functioning of a healthy democracy. As an example, he refers to the role of the press in the Watergate scandal, where investigative journalists uncovered a major political scandal that had widespread consequences. This shows the importance of journalism in maintaining accountability, especially when institutions may otherwise hide wrongdoing.

Newspapers ability to produce accountability journalism is shrinking and why I am convinced that those changes are secular monotonic and irreversible rather than being merely cyclic and waiting for the next for the next go around and then two I want to talk about the features of a journalistic ecosystem that I think will have to obtain to get anything like the accountability journalism we've been used to out of the out of the current e land so the first observation made uh made widely and probably with the most um uh probably in most depth by Paul star and creation of the media is that dated from some time between the rise of the penny press and the end of the second world war we had a very unusual circumstance and I think especially in the United States where we had commercial entities producing critical public goods right we had ad supported newspapers producing accountability journalism now it's unusual to have uh that degree of focus on essentially both missions both making a profit and producing this kind of public value but that was the historical circumstance and it lasted for decades um but it was an accident right there was a set of forces that made that possible and they weren't deep truth the commercial success of the newspapers and their linking of that to to accountability journalism wasn't a deep a deep truth about reality Bestbuy...

2) What does Shirky say about the relationship between newspapers and advertisers? Which websites does he mention as having replaced major revenue-generators for newspapers (e.g. jobs, personal ads etc.)?

Shirky discusses how newspapers historically relied heavily on advertising revenue to fund their operations, particularly through classified ads. However, with the advent of the internet, classified advertising and job listings have largely moved to websites like Craigslist and Monster.com, which have replaced these significant revenue streams for newspapers. These websites were able to offer cheaper, more efficient alternatives, contributing to the financial struggles of traditional print media.

3) Shirky talks about the 'unbundling of content'. This means people are reading newspapers in a different way. How does he suggest audiences are consuming news stories in the digital age?

Shirky suggests that 'unbundling of content' refers to the way audiences now consume news in the digital age by selecting individual stories or pieces of content rather than reading the entire newspaper. In the past, newspapers provided a bundled package of news, but now, with digital platforms, people can access specific articles or topics they are interested in without having to engage with other content. This has led to a change in how people consume news, where they can easily pick and choose articles from various sources, rather than relying on a single newspaper.

4) Shirky also talks about the power of shareable media. How does he suggest the child abuse scandal with the Catholic Church may have been different if the internet had been widespread in 1992?

Shirky argues that if the internet had been widespread in 1992, the child abuse scandal within the Catholic Church might have unfolded very differently. The scandal was initially hidden or downplayed by many institutions. However, with the internet, shareable media would have allowed survivors, journalists, and activists to share information more quickly and broadly, leading to faster exposure. The viral nature of online content would have allowed the story to gain momentum and spread much more rapidly, possibly accelerating public awareness and action around the issue, forcing accountability sooner than it did in reality.

5) Why does Shirky argue against paywalls? 

Shirky argues against paywalls because they limit the accessibility of news to a broader audience, which can undermine the democratic role of journalism. By placing content behind a paywall, newspapers and media organizations are restricting the reach of important information, which might otherwise be shared freely. Shirky believes that in the digital age, information should be openly accessible to encourage wider engagement and sharing. He suggests that sharing content is vital for the dissemination of information, and paywalls hinder the ability of news organizations to harness the power of shareable media, thus limiting their impact.

6) What is a 'social good'? In what way might journalism be a 'social good'?

A 'social good' refers to something that benefits society as a whole, contributing to the well-being, education, or quality of life of the population. Journalism can be considered a 'social good' because it plays a crucial role in informing the public, holding power accountable, and fostering a well-informed electorate. It provides the information necessary for citizens to make informed decisions about their communities, governments, and the world. Quality journalism contributes to transparency, social justice, and civic engagement, which are essential for a healthy, functioning democracy.

7) Shirky says newspapers are in terminal decline. How does he suggest we can replace the important role in society newspapers play? What is the short-term danger to this solution that he describes?

Shirky suggests that the important role newspapers play in society—disseminating news, holding power accountable, and fostering public discourse—can be replaced by new digital models. He points to citizen journalism, blogs, and smaller, specialized media outlets that can still provide meaningful news and ensure some level of accountability, though they may not be as comprehensive as traditional newspapers.

However, Shirky warns of a short-term danger: the loss of revenue and institutional support for traditional newspapers. This could lead to a period where quality journalism is harder to sustain, making it more difficult to provide reliable news and increasing the risk of misinformation spreading.

8) Look at the first question and answer regarding institutional power. Give us your own opinion: how important is it that major media brands such as the New York Times or the Guardian continue to stay in business and provide news?

I believe it's very important that major media brands like *The New York Times* and *The Guardian* continue to stay in business and provide news. These institutions play a crucial role in maintaining high standards of journalism, including investigative reporting and holding powerful institutions accountable. Their resources and editorial oversight allow for more comprehensive and fact-checked reporting, which smaller outlets or citizen journalism often lack.

Major media brands also provide a common ground for national and global discourse. They help set the agenda on key issues, provide in-depth analysis, and ensure a level of credibility that fosters public trust. Without them, there's a risk of increasing misinformation and fragmentation of news, where sensationalism or biased reporting could dominate, potentially leading to a less informed and more polarized public. 

In short, while alternative media and new forms of reporting are valuable, these major outlets help anchor the media landscape and support democracy through quality, reliable journalism.

Part 2: MM55 - Media, Publics, Protest and Power

Media Magazine 55 has an excellent feature on power and the media. Go to our Media Magazine archive, click on MM55 and scroll to page 38 to read the article Media, Publics, Protest and Power', a summary of Media academic Natalie Fenton’s talk to a previous Media Magazine conference. Answer the following questions:

1) What are the three overlapping fields that have an influence on the relationship between media and democracy?

Political, Economic and Journalistic, all of which overlap to a certain extent.

The political field intervenes when the state powerfully limits or enables the diversity of voices and views in the press, through its power to regulate, deregulate or subsidise the media.

The economic field refers to commercial influences that encompass elements such as concentration of ownership; profit pressures relating to types of ownership; type of funding (such as advertising or paying audiences); and level and intensity of market competition.

The journalistic field refers to assumptions that have emerged over time about what constitutes ‘news’, and about the purpose of journalism; practices of news gathering and sourcing; norms of objectivity and impartiality – the ethics and practice of journalism that contribute to the news ecology in any one place at any one moment in time.

2) What is ‘churnalism’ and what issues are there currently in journalism?

In a corporate news world it is now difficult to maintain profit margins and shareholder returns – unless you employ fewer journalists. This means not only insecure, short- term contracts, but also fewer journalists with more space to fill in less time. And this often leads to a greater use of unattributed rewrites of press agency or public relations material, and the cut- and-paste practice now known as churnalism.

3) What statistics are provided by Fenton to demonstrate the corporate dominance of a small number of conglomerates? 

Just three companies control 71% of UK national newspaper circulation while only five groups control more than 80% of combined online and offline news.

4) What is the 'climate of fear' that Fenton writes about in terms of politics and the media? 

In this climate, political parties, the police and other institutions are reluctant to investigate wrong- doing in the news media, hinder the expansion of large media conglomerates, or introduce new regulation of news organisations and journalistic practice.

5) Fenton finishes her article by discussing pluralism, the internet and power. What is your opinion on this crucial debate - has the internet empowered audiences and encouraged democracy or is power even more concentrated in the hands of a few corporate giants?

The internet may have ushered in a new form of political activism, but its consequences may not be the ones that were intended, or that can necessarily deliver the democratic gains that were hoped for.

On one hand, the internet has empowered audiences in unprecedented ways. It has democratized access to information, enabling people from all walks of life to share ideas, engage in political discourse, and organize social movements. Social media platforms, blogs, and independent news outlets provide voices that can challenge traditional media power structures, offering more diverse perspectives and facilitating more inclusive dialogue.

However, on the other hand, power has arguably become even more concentrated in the hands of a few corporate giants. Companies like Google, Facebook, Amazon, and Twitter dominate much of the digital landscape, controlling vast amounts of data, advertising revenue, and content distribution. These platforms have significant influence over what information is seen, shared, and amplified, often prioritizing profit-driven algorithms over the quality or diversity of content. This centralization of power raises concerns about how these corporations shape public opinion, regulate speech, and potentially limit access to alternative viewpoints.

In some ways, the internet has both empowered and limited democracy. While it offers opportunities for more voices to be heard, it also allows large tech companies to control much of the digital infrastructure, leading to a situation where a few players wield immense power over the flow of information. So, while the internet has certainly democratized access to information, there is a valid concern that the concentration of power in a few tech giants may diminish the true potential of online pluralism and democracy.