What does the death of the Commonwealth Press Union mean?
Posted by B. Pecquerie on October 28, 2008 at 3:46 PM
The Editors Weblog reported some sad news for the newspaper industry this morning: the closure of the Commonwealth Press Union (CPU) and its magazine CPQ.
For a lot of editors and journalists trained by the CPU, receiving its newsletter, or participating in its Editors Forum or the regular CPU conferences, this is painful news. It is painful not just because they have lost a partner (and frequently a sponsor), but also because the CPU was the oldest international press association in the world. The CPU would have celebrated its hundredth anniversary in 2009 - the Empire Press Union was founded in 1909 - but the board has scheduled the closure of almost all its activities on 31 December 2008.
What does the closure this historical institution mean and what will the consequences be for the current CPU members in almost fifty countries?
Who will take care of small newspapers and small organizations?
In the obituary of CPU, it is said that, very soon, a Commonwealth Press Training & Education Trust (CPTET), will take over some CPU activities, mainly focused on training. The CPU Foundation, which funds training, will be maintained, but at the moment the financing behind this structure is not yet set. But the basic idea of the CPU - through the unique and common language of English - was to create links and to network between publishers, editors and journalists from the 49 countries belonging to the CPU. The new trust will loose this ambition, even if the contrary is said on paper.
The most important challenge will be to ensure the balance between big countries/small countries, big newspapers/small organizations. Rationalization will focus on larger countries and newspapers. The real risk is if we forget the Salomon Islands, Fiji, the small African states and the Caribbean countries. Australia will take over for the Pacific, South Africa would like to support African English-speaking countries and the US and the British Foreign Office will certainly take care of the Caribbean, but the global picture will disappear.
It is true that a press association based on the Commonwealth souvenir and the thirties was maybe not the most up-to-date organization, but its death will break a worldwide community unified by common ideals and ethical views. I'm sure regional organizations will do their best for small organizations, but with very specific geopolitical interests. And for this reason, the disappearance of CPU and a global point of view on journalism is bad news.
What will be the future of international press organisations?
The death of a 100 year old association is a symbol and a signal for all other newspapers organisations. Two years ago, the IPI (International Press Institute), encountered significant problems but found a way to maintain its activities. But are IFRA in Germany or WAN in France (the World Association of Newspapers, including the World Editors Forum) not threatened by the evolution of the newspapers business model? Regional organizations are also potentially in trouble, such as the IAPA in the Americas, TAEF in Africa (organization for editors-in-chief) or Panpa in Oceania, and so on.
The closure of CPU and the difficulties faced by the IPI clearly demonstrate that the existing business model for these organizations is under threat: how long will they rely on state funds, sponsors' money, conference fees and memberships? For instance, more and more members want to consume business information as they consume music on their iPods: by just paying for the specific item they want, and no more.
The subscription business model is under attack and press organizations must anticipate this shift.
Another problem is the development of webinars and online conferences as competitors to the current "face-to-face conferences". Either traditional organizations grasp these new ideas and the opportunity they represent, or the new pure online players will. It will take time to define standards and to build up customers and partners, but it will happen.
See also:
End of the Commonwealth Press Union on December 31, 2008
For a lot of editors and journalists trained by the CPU, receiving its newsletter, or participating in its Editors Forum or the regular CPU conferences, this is painful news. It is painful not just because they have lost a partner (and frequently a sponsor), but also because the CPU was the oldest international press association in the world. The CPU would have celebrated its hundredth anniversary in 2009 - the Empire Press Union was founded in 1909 - but the board has scheduled the closure of almost all its activities on 31 December 2008.
What does the closure this historical institution mean and what will the consequences be for the current CPU members in almost fifty countries?
Who will take care of small newspapers and small organizations?
In the obituary of CPU, it is said that, very soon, a Commonwealth Press Training & Education Trust (CPTET), will take over some CPU activities, mainly focused on training. The CPU Foundation, which funds training, will be maintained, but at the moment the financing behind this structure is not yet set. But the basic idea of the CPU - through the unique and common language of English - was to create links and to network between publishers, editors and journalists from the 49 countries belonging to the CPU. The new trust will loose this ambition, even if the contrary is said on paper.
The most important challenge will be to ensure the balance between big countries/small countries, big newspapers/small organizations. Rationalization will focus on larger countries and newspapers. The real risk is if we forget the Salomon Islands, Fiji, the small African states and the Caribbean countries. Australia will take over for the Pacific, South Africa would like to support African English-speaking countries and the US and the British Foreign Office will certainly take care of the Caribbean, but the global picture will disappear.
It is true that a press association based on the Commonwealth souvenir and the thirties was maybe not the most up-to-date organization, but its death will break a worldwide community unified by common ideals and ethical views. I'm sure regional organizations will do their best for small organizations, but with very specific geopolitical interests. And for this reason, the disappearance of CPU and a global point of view on journalism is bad news.
What will be the future of international press organisations?
The death of a 100 year old association is a symbol and a signal for all other newspapers organisations. Two years ago, the IPI (International Press Institute), encountered significant problems but found a way to maintain its activities. But are IFRA in Germany or WAN in France (the World Association of Newspapers, including the World Editors Forum) not threatened by the evolution of the newspapers business model? Regional organizations are also potentially in trouble, such as the IAPA in the Americas, TAEF in Africa (organization for editors-in-chief) or Panpa in Oceania, and so on.
The closure of CPU and the difficulties faced by the IPI clearly demonstrate that the existing business model for these organizations is under threat: how long will they rely on state funds, sponsors' money, conference fees and memberships? For instance, more and more members want to consume business information as they consume music on their iPods: by just paying for the specific item they want, and no more.
The subscription business model is under attack and press organizations must anticipate this shift.
Another problem is the development of webinars and online conferences as competitors to the current "face-to-face conferences". Either traditional organizations grasp these new ideas and the opportunity they represent, or the new pure online players will. It will take time to define standards and to build up customers and partners, but it will happen.
See also:
End of the Commonwealth Press Union on December 31, 2008
1 Comments
Leave a comment
1 TrackBacks
Listed below are links to blogs that reference this entry: What does the death of the Commonwealth Press Union mean?.
TrackBack URL for this entry: http://www.editorsweblog.org/mt/mt-tb.cgi/7892
» oxoeiixbebo from jyajuaja
uoluoiuj Read More
The news fo Cpu closing is something I have been suspecting for a couple of years since the rationalisation of the CPU, requests for opinions with no subsequent feedback and the continual postponement of the biannual conference.
It’s a real blow and especially so to small newspapers.
The beauty of the CPU was that it somehow managed to get the big to support the small and rub shoulders in a way that everyone benefited. The editor’s forum was the most educational newspaper experience I had. Setting aside the common friendship it created between journalists across the globe, the editor’s forum created a bubble in which the most serious issues were discussed and every angle was covered because of the very diverse experiences of those participating.
Editorial independence at gunpoint is very different to commercial pressure even though similar basic themes emerge. The Penang Forum (where editors and other shared views on may issues) initiated by Gilbert Anee and others was a spectacular success and in many ways helped us wake up to the internet era. More importantly I know that many editors returned to work invigorated and better understanding the depth of a job in which it is easy to become battle weary. Many good journalists work under intolerable pressure and with little recognition - the CPU provided that just by putting us together.
I assume the decision comes from the increasing costs v less financial support. Despite the noises it makes the British Government which was a strong supporter of the CPU through the Foreign Office is no longer the model of good governance let alone genuinely interested in the investment in long term quality democracy in the Commonwealth.
It also has to be said that although the CPU might have needed to and indeed attempted to re-invent itself it is needed as much today as it was through the last century.
The fact is that the distorting effect of new communication and media, the cut throat pressure on advertising and production have eroded the concerns for quality journalism within many organisations instead of focusing on how this can be delivered through modern media. I don’t just mean plagiarism, the ripping off of the work of others. Without opportunities like the Editors Forum, and to a degree the conference that followed were an opportunity for editors to shake their commercial owners into listening to their deeper concerns affecting editorial policy, less well funded small entities never get pulled away from the desk to think and plan.
For the small newspaper the treadmill is getting faster and we are almost twice undermanned as a decade ago with pressure to produce in a variety of media – the result is pressure from advertisers to use their economic muscle to try and ‘buy in’. Equally governments through their economic power also put more albeit indirect pressure even in the most peaceful of communities. The CPU was a great refuge to be able to get the backing of a prestigious organisation simply to say ‘This editor is right. These are the principles that apply to good journalism.”
Sure the tabloids and the quality press in UK can live without the CPU but they too rely (usually at no cost) on the many journalists spread throughout the Commonwealth who have true local knowledge and struggle to write a decent report in very difficult circumstances. They might have taken a greater interest. The maintenance of good journalism in a network through the Commonwealth is of enormous value to global democracy - much more than academic papers. This is why the strong arm of the CPU was training. When the many who have benefited form the CPU move on who will provide that lifeline for the small guys? Not the local politicians that’s for sure….
Regards Dominique Searle