Results matching “news media report negati”

The UK government may ask the Office of Fair Trading (OFT) to consider the impact of local council newspapers on local commercial newspaper publishers, Print Week and This is Local London report. Or it may not, media commentator Roy Greenslade points out.

Members of parliament from the three main parties last week called for council papers to be culled. Local newspapers have long protested that council papers take away from their falling market share.

         IN A SMALL theatre space underneath basement level of the Centre Pompidou in Paris, surrounded by videos of surreal contemporary 'dance,' the contributors to 'Libé des philosophes,' the November 19th, 2009 edition of Libération in which philosophers wrote all of the newspaper's content, gathered to ostensibly discuss the theme of 'philosophy and journalism'. We all filed in solemnly, the few young people avoiding eye contact with each other, pretending to be serious; the attitude was similar to the whole 'I'm going to go read Proust in the corner café with my notebook and black coat and coffee at 23:30 on a Saturday' kind of thing.

            The French word that is often used for 'moderated' is animé, which to my mind always means someone who 'animates' the gathering, someone who breathes life into a room of socially awkward academics, old people who have nothing better to do and young idealistic Bac or first-year Fac students. Marianne Alphant, the Centre Pompidou's lady-in-charge of expositions, and Robert Maggiori, a philosophy teacher and a regular writer for Libération, did their best as animateurs, although Maggiori was clearly in command. Probably because he seemed to be the one who organized the whole thing.

            After finding a seat, scoping the sparse audience, deciding that I was out of place then turning on the recorder (download the recording), I realized I had no actual idea what the talk was to be about. I was told to come, presumably, because I have a modest philosophy degree and an intermediate command of French; neither of which were much help when one only knows the title of the talk and have never really read Libération. Luckily for you I will draw out the interesting bits from the discussion, but it's a bit like pulling gum out of your hair; you don't get much to show for your efforts and will have to cut it in the end anyway.

            Present at the table, complete with mini bottles of water and much hand wringing underneath it, was Barbara Cassin, a philologist and sophist expert (my favorite of the speakers, 'animated' and interesting); Denis Kambouchner, a Descartes and ethics expert with big white hair; Frédéric Worms (who looks a little like Clay Shirky and managed to creep me out by staring at me for half the time), a Bergson specialist with an uncomfortable laugh; and Ruwen Ogien, who was slightly bitter about not being able to write about chemical castration.

            At first they focused on the technical and administrative details of getting 60 philosophers together to write an entire newspaper, cover to cover, including the weather and sports sections. This is the third year Libération has put together an edition written by a certain academic class, this year's philosophers having been preceded by historians and writers. Since a good portion of every newspaper that is ever published is pre-prepared as opposed to the quickly written actual 'news' parts, this posed quite a challenge for the philosophers.

            Philosophy takes a long time. The most seemingly straightforward of questions can take days or weeks to answer to one's own satisfaction, and sometimes you find at the end that you didn't even answer it or that it ends up being irrelevant to what you're working on. This is pretty much diametrically opposite to journalistic writing, and the philosophy vs. journalism, prepared vs. news theme was definitely the most interesting subject discussed by the panel, however briefly touched upon. In a nutshell, the philosophers were all competing for the pre-prepared parts during their editorial meetings, but since a good percentage of the contributors were abroad they got first dibs.

            The journalists at Libé apparently love having the philosophers there, and it's a good mix; lively discussions take place in the hallways, the pleasantness and solicitude of the philosophers enliven the journalists and together they form a community neither philosophical nor journalistic. Maybe today's struggling newspapers could learn a lesson from this and take an injection of fresh insight from 'outsiders' helping the editorial process.

            Maggiori discussed in depth these kinds practical issues, particularly the issues of dividing duties and the massive editing cuts as all the proposed articles went over the allowed length. After this Maggiori did manage to get in some nuggets that piqued my attention; he mentioned that he once met a German journalist who was taken aback by the 'Libé des philosophes' idea, and the total editorial freedom the philosophers have.

            "In Germany, it would never be possible. No newspaper would give their editing over to philosophers to write the entire edition," the German reportedly said. Maggiori thinks Libé is the only newspaper in the world that has done so, and was able to, because of the status of philosophers in France.

            In France, he said, "we are used to public and televised debates featuring philosophers, among others." Philosophers are consulted and listened to; their opinions are sought out and valued. This, in my opinion, is one of the best things about French society and a real problem in North America where it is clearly lacking.

            According to Maggiori, having a philosopher's edition allows the newspaper to have an 'organic link' with intellectuals and to facilitate the valuable 'long, slow thinking' that philosophers do. He continued to say that newspapers need to have such a link with the 'production of thought' as a way to save themselves; Libération went in the opposite direction of 'green' reporting (with short, online articles) to promote and publish the long, reflective and analytical articles of the philosophers. This is exactly the kind of quality reporting and content that has been and must continue to be newspaper's strong points if they are to survive.

            Barbara Cassin went on to detail her experience with writing about national identity and the questionnaire that accompanied that task, which was loaded with assumptions (as most non-philosophical texts are) thus required a good deal of interpretation and analysis; not quite what the writers intended but it ended up being a good article by virtue of this. Here the opposition (a concept philosophers revel in) between philosophy and journalism was seriously treated. She said "the 'time/pace' (temps) of philosophy is completely contrary to the 'time/pace' of journalism," that "while philosophers are of the 're-taking', 're-thinking', the cogitation of national identity, here in this case we had to go 'on site', find things and make phone calls" which is not really philosophers are used to doing.

            The talk continued, mostly with everyone else described what they wrote about and the process of finding a topic and writing on it. Interestingly enough, Denis Kambouchner said he knows Placebo, the alt rock/metal group, and would have liked to do a piece on them. He went on to describe the process or 'exercise' of writing journalistically as one of writing in a language of effectuation and 'in the last degree,' an 'extremely simple process for ourselves' that regardless is interesting for both the reader and writer, and valuable for society in bringing philosophical dialogue to the mainstream.

            Throughout, Maggiori controlled the talk, saving us from awkward pauses and topic drop-offs. He personally stayed the most on topic and had some good opinions.

            He thinks that rigorous philosophical critique must be defended in order to both save newspapers, which can be its home and promoter, and philosophical discussion itself. On TV, the radio, and in many newspapers journalists and writers are told to write things quickly and simply, even just mentioning a keyword. Critiques and comments are just mindless summaries, only saying whether something is good or bad with little reflection, like looking up ratings for a hair drier on the internet.

            Maggiori was clearly upset at this kind of journalism (as he outlined it), saying it has a serious negative impact on quality, and called it a 'real menace', something that as a 'stupefied avoidance of the difficult' would be 'death for us' if it appeared in Libé.  

            The speakers finished up by affirming the importance of the union of philosophy and journalism, both critiques and reflections on news and culture. Unfortunately I could not understand everything at this point because the speakers were talking quite fast, and, getting rather excited, began using a level of vocabulary and grammar I could not easily follow. Nevertheless, they all seemed in agreement that such a marriage of philosophy and journalism was important to society, and even a part of the intellectual's responsibility to reflect upon the events that shape our world, rather than just transmit 'what happened'.

            It was too bad that the questions asked seemed to rather miss the point and focused things that could have answered themselves if the inquirers had read the articles on the subjects they were asking about.  The panel seemed rather miffed by this point and eager to leave, as was I since I didn't get to ask my question.

            Actually, if had I gotten hold - from the cold, wrinkly hands of the old lady who Bogarted it - of the microphone, I'm now not sure what I was going to ask. It was surely something along the lines of the 'opposition' in the kind of work philosophers do and what journalists do that was mentioned, and the entente that they all seemed to have when thrown together to make a newspaper. I would have imagined them getting into various kinds of (potentially amusing) disagreements making publication quite difficult, but then I remembered that this is France and philosophers are respected and respectful here. This is not to pose any kind of elitist or Francophile argument about the relations and status of intellectuals in society, but it is indeed difficult, as the German reporter said to Maggiori, to imagine such a thing happening in many other countries.

            Even so, this kind of initiative of the 'special edition' type is certainly a great way for newspapers to help save themselves. Rather than focusing on online content and its instant-access, tiny summaries and gross glossing over of issues, maybe it would be a good idea for papers to play their strengths; quality reporting, respectability and accountability, high intellectual standards and intelligent critique and reflection. However those who stick to the paper format are still running a business after all, and unfortunately quality and intellect doesn't always sell.

WMA recording of the panel

It has been a rough couple of years for the newspaper industry with the recession taking its toll on the financial stability of many organisations. In the past year alone at least ten publications have filed for bankruptcy and many have been forced to close their doors. With newspapers treading fast to try to keep their heads above water many have cut back funding for more costly types of news. One of the first things to go has been investigative journalism, considered by many publications to be a luxury. The time and investment of multiple resources in a single issue is something that many publications simply can no longer afford.

These cuts have raised alarm bells. The potential loss of 'the fourth estate' and 'government watchdog' have united many in the cause to protect the practice of journalism, even if the business and profitability of it is doomed to fail.

One method suggested to preserve this type of journalism is to run as a non-profit organisation. Seeking the status under the claim that journalism is a 'public good' publications are free from commerical pressures and the disappointment of dwindling circulation figures, relying only on donations from those who feel the cause worthy enough.

It is at this point that the Texas Tribune enters the scene. The online-only news site launched early last week as a non-profit venture in an attempt to fill a gap in quality local journalism in Texas. The Editors Weblog spoke with editor-in-chief, Evan Smith to look at Tribune's website and non-profit ambitions in closer detail.


The inspiration:
The big name in non-profit news is ProPublica. Led by former Wall Street Journal managing editor Paul Steiger, the organisation began publishing in June 2008 and has consistently drawn in large sums of donations, with key sponsor the Sandler Foundation contributing annually. ProPublica, which will write an article then offer it to a newspaper to publish, has carried out some impressive investigative feats to date, most notably its collaboration with the New York Times, published in August. The 13,000 word article which cost an estimated $400,000 to produce examined the events that took place at the Memorial Medical Centre following Hurricane Katrina. The piece highlighted the importance of such investigative journalism and made the need to save it even more apparent.
 
The Texas Tribune aims to achieve something similar on a smaller and more political scale, offering Texans a news source designed to compliment local newspapers that already exist: "We've made a point of not presenting this as a binary choice: A or B. We believe it's additive: A and B. Read your local paper and read us. In fact read as much stuff as there is out there" says Smith.

"We're simply presenting ourselves as one in a series of things that you need to read and listen to and view and access if you want to be a thoughtful and engaged Texan." 

In his first posting on the website Smith talked about what the Tribune was attempting to achieve: "What we mean to do on an ongoing basis is right there in our stated mission: to promote civic engagement and discourse on public policy, politics, government, and other matters of statewide concern."

In ProPublica fashion, the Tribune has said that all the information published on its website is up for grabs for other media organisations as part of a content-sharing plan designed to aide other reporters who might not have the time to look into an issue in depth.  Matt Stiles, one of the Tribune's staff reporters writers told Poynter Online in an interview: "Ultimately, we'd like to tell every paper in the state, 'If you like this data set, just take it'."

"I hope reporters will come see the information, download it, remix it and be creative with it."

The build up:
In July this year Smith announced he was leaving his position as editor-in-chief of established Texas Monthly magazine to take up the post as CEO and editor of the Tribune. A few months later, the Tribune added Elise Hu, Emily Ramshaw and Matt Stiles to its list of experienced journalists.

In an interview with Poynter in September, Ramshaw talked of her decision to join the project: "I feel, and still feel, that the newspaper business is in serious crisis. I'm not content to cling to a deck chair and go down with a sinking ship."

Ramshaw worked for The Dallas Morning News for six years, the last three of which she was state investigative reporter.  "We're trying to prepare for the next incarnation of journalism. If this venture is going to work, it's going to work because serious, talented journalists were brave enough to take the risk," she said.

The Tribune has built up a selection of notable reporters willing to do this and Chairman and co-founder John Thorton had been quoted as saying: "We didn't hire journalists out of work. We hired reporters who their editors were pissed off that they lost them."

Smith and Thornton worked hard on securing donations, with Thornton himself donating $1 million to the Tribune. In early October the founders confirmed they had received a further $750, 000 in grants from the Houston Endowment and the John S. and James L. Knight Foundation. The Tribune is now only slighty short of the $4 million target it needs to continue running for two years, with a current total of $3.7 million.

The sum is considerable for a start up website, as paidContent's Staci Kramer has noted: "Unlike some of the new crop of local and regional news startups, the Tribune is launching with enough money for a well-paid staff of 16, including 11 reporters," referring to salaries of $315K for the editor in chief, and up to $90K for seasoned reporters.

As for promotion of the site itself, Smith told the Editors Weblog just how useful social networking sites have been. Regular updates for the public on the status of the site via Facebook, Twitter and the site's own newsletter built up a sense of curiosity over what exactly they had in store for last Tuesday's launch.
 
"We've been very aggressive on Facebook and Twitter both to promote the content and also to connect with our community of followers" said Smith. "We've also used both to aggressively push for funding. We've generated quite a lot of memberships in the Tribune which are much like memberships in public radio by pushing over Facebook and over Twitter messages that relate to our fundraising campaign, and they've been very successful," he says, citing the 1400 founding members who have given between $50 and $5000 to the Tribune out of their own pockets.

What does the site look like?
The website debuted with top stories on the mistreatment of disabled children in public schools, the Democratic lean of El Paso in an otherwise Republican state, and the results of a poll carried out by the Tribune and the University of Texas.

The site itself is divided into ten pages, the organisation of which differ from your average news website. Offering 11 databases under a section titled 'Library' for further reading, the databases contain information ranging from federal campaign donations, gubernatorial appointees and lawmaker spending. In addition to this there is a complete electoral directory of every Texan senator and governor- the site essentially offers a single space for complete personal and political data on the '242 occupants of the state's highest offices'.

It is clear that a lot of time has gone into collaborating this research, and according to the Nieman Journalism Lab, the Waco Tribune-Herald has already taken advantage of the new resource and published some Tribune content. 

Aside from the databases, the site boasts eight of its own blogs and links to some 25 others; has a 'topics' section where stories can be found based on theme; a calender, where information about local events can be found or submitted; and a 'Tweetwire', a Twitter feed from all Texan politicians on the website's front page.

Compared to the recent launch of another local non-profit news website, Oakland Local, the Tribune's website is much more sophisticated. The Texan team have embraced the capacities of the internet and technology to their full, utilizing social media, widgets, videos, blogs and mobile applications- something Smith believes to be key to the way in which the use of media is changing.

"In consumption of media people are paying more attention to online media today then ever before," say Smith. "I look at my almost 13 year old daughter and how she consumes media and it's not at all in print it's almost entirely online and I think that's the trend line."

Smith suggests that publishers need to adapt to measure up to this changed method of consuming news: "You cannot simply go out and record the news, present that to people and believe that that's going to be enough. You need to give them the tools to better understand their world, to better know their state, to better know the people they elected, to better hold them accountable and that often is all not simply conventional reporting but the amassing and presenting of data that allows people to access the world in which they live from a more detailed level."

Why will the Tribune succeed where others have failed?
Whilst successful local non-profit news publications do exists, the Voice of San Diego and the MinnPost to name a few- there are also notable failures such as the Rocky Mountain Independent and InDenver Times, two online start-ups founded by Steve Foster earlier this year. How will the Tribune ensure that it doesn't suffer the same fate?

Smith says that the Tribune essentially has a better business plan, arguing that the RMI and InDenver Times failed because they were run by journalists, not business people and "didn't really have a plan for how to make the model sustainable."

Part of the reason the Tribune is choosing to remain online-only is because "the cost of printing a print publication for postage and paper and print facilities is so expensive that you reduce your overhead dramatically and therefore make it much more likely that your business model will sustain."

Of course the Tribune's has also managed to raise a healthy budget, further insulating itself against some of the problems faced by other publications. "Money is, as in all things, the mother's milk of your operation," Smith says, continuing on to mention that the having the financial capacity to buy the latest technology and hire top journalists will "go a very long way to allowing us to do our best work."

Smith's views bear resemblance to industry commentator Alan Mutter, who recently critized many online non-profit publications for not being business-minded enough. Mutter accuses these publications of "a suicidally stubborn determination on the part of the organizers to be in the business they want to be in, instead of attending to the business they need to attend to," and he argued early last month that, "A business, especially a start-up, requires far more than passion for the work. It requires close attention to the nuts and bolts of raising money, making sales and controlling expenses."

How will the Tribune navigate ethical issues?
A nagging question over the non-profit model is how publications will be able to resist influence from major donors. Smith argues that the seperation between donors and the editorial team is no different to the situation between advertisers and editorial: "I edited a magazine for nine years in which we had big advertisers who also happened to often be the subject of stories and the transactional economy that supports the operations of a for profit publication has no relationship what-so-ever to the journalism inside, or it shouldn't anyway, not at a good magazine and not at a good newspaper."

"Just because someone advertises doesn't mean you go easy on them or you go hard on their competitors."

Nevetherless, the non-profit news model is still in early stages and very dependent on the income from donors. Even for-profit news publications have not been immune to advertsing clients flexing their muscles in tough financial times, with a Detroit paper recently being accused of reporting on private health care following a request from client Humana (who subsequently purchased an ad next to the story).

What would Smith do if he was approached by a donor to cover a particular story? 

"Donors don't expect that were going to write about their issues or about their enemy's issues in a negative way, they're not looking for us to take sides- they're supporting the principle that hovers above all this activity: that journalism in the public interest has value."

"Any donor who is unhappy with the coverage we provide because of such an expectation is welcome to his or her money back," he says, adding: "I'd rather lose my funding then lose my integrity."

So are non-profits the next incarnation of journalism?
The wider debate on whether or not non-profits are the future of journalism has been raging for a while. Online magazine, Slate's Jack Shafer has weighed in for the negative: "In the current arrangement, we're substituting one flawed business model for another. For-profit newspapers lose money accidentally. Nonprofit news operations lose money deliberately."

Thornton, the Tribune's chairman, hit back at the remarks: "I call it the Stockholm Syndrome. They are sympathizing with their advertiser-captors."

So who is right? Is the non-profit model the future of journalism?

Yes and no. It is unlikely to become a general solution for newspapers simply because of the huge sums of money involved, but for nieche reporting and more time/fund consuming journalism such as investigative reporting, it could definiatley be a viable option.

The idea compares favourably at least to the suggestion of government bailouts. As Thorton wrote of the "obvious fox-in-the-henhouse issues that arise--to mix animal metaphors--from government watchdogs funded out of government coffers."

As the first serious, state-focused news site with a decent enough amount of money behind it and what seems to be the right attitude toward embracing the capacities of the digital age and the changing face of journalism- whether or not the Texas Tribune succeeds will be key to the way in which the non-profit model is viewed.

As Tribune reporter Christe Hu suggests: "Journalism is at a crossroads right now. We're seeing not just survival of the fittest but a 'mutation of the species.' "

"I think the non-profit model has just as good a shot as anything else."

The US Department of Defense will end its $1.5 million contract with the contentious PR firm that created extensive profiles of journalists wishing to embed with troops, Stars and Stripes reports. Last week, the newspaper published an article contending that the military used The Rendon Group's reports to decide whether or not to allow a journalist to be embedded and to shape reporters' coverage, something Pentagon spokespeople repeatedly denied.

In an email sent to Stars and Stripes, Rear Adm. Gregory J. Smith wrote: "I have been here since early June and at no time has anyone who worked for me ever conducted themselves in a manner as your newspaper alleged. I cannot and will not speculate on the past, although I have found no systemic issues with fairness or equity in the way U.S. forces have run their media embed program."

"Who guards the Guardian?" went the headline in last week's edition of political magazine, New Statesman, who asked if the Guardian was abusing its status to damage commercial rivals.

The New Statesman referred to the Guardian as "influential" "imposing" and "corporate" and suggested that the MediaGuardian, in particular, was being used by owner Guardian Media Group as an editorial battleaxe to discredit competitors.

The London-based Evening Standard newspaper today launches an unprecedented 3-week-long pr campaign to tell Londoners it is "sorry" for the way it has conducted itself in the past, reports the Guardian's Roy Greenslade.

The UK capital's ubiquitous buses and tubes will be emblazoned with one of several messages, each beginning with the word "sorry." One message says "Sorry for losing touch", while other messages apologise for the paper's negative reporting, taking readers for granted, being complacent and being predictable. Some messages will also appear on poster boards around the city.

On Saturday morning the New York Times Company decided to extend the deadline for Boston Globe unions to agree to $20 million in concessions. Over half an hour after the deadline, they extended it from May 2 to midnight on Sunday May 3.

"Because there has been progress on reaching needed cost savings, The Boston Globe will extend the deadline for reaching complete agreements with its unions until midnight Sunday May 3," Globe spokesman Robert Powers said in a statement. However the Globe reached Sunday night with no deal and hour before the deadline, the Times Company announced it would file the required 60-day shutdown notice under federal law.

The Associated Press board of directors has announced that it will launch an industry initiative to protect news content "from misappropriation online," developing a system to tag and track content distributed online to determine if it is being legally used.  At the AP's annual meeting in San Diego on Monday, Chairman Dean Singleton said that the organisation would work with portals and other partners who properly license content, and pursue legal and legislative actions against those who do not.

"We can no longer stand by and watch others walk off with our work under misguided legal theories," Singleton asserted. AP President Tom Curley said that the initiative will also include developing new search pages that point users to the latest and most authoritative sources of breaking news.

With the rapid development of new media platforms, newspapers have been at the forefront of pushing through innovative and easily accessible products to satisfy their consumers thirst for twenty-four hour news. This is undoubtedly an exciting time for the newspaper industry, but how do reporters and editors on the ground feel about the changes happening in their industry?

Facts

The National Union of Journalists' survey on this issue in the UK makes stark reading: the introduction of new media has increased the workload for 75% of union members and 16% have received no training at all in new media. Reports have also emerged of journalists who routinely completed three print edition stories a day who are now being asked to provide three multi-media stories a day, with video footage and podcasts. One reporter said: "You would need to be an octopus to be able to do everything they want doing."

Positive Feedback

The survey results are worrying, however, I spoke to sub-editors and received positive feedback about the changes in the industry. Karl Smith, a sub-editor at the Daily Telegraph in the UK - a newspaper that has radically overhauled its newsroom in response to media innovations - who focuses on the print edition, told me that the change has increased dialogue between staff members and that he was comfortable with the changes.

Smith said: "Having the hub in the centre of the office makes the news conferences seem a lot less exclusive than if (as elsewhere) they're in a corner office. The web staff are right next to the print people as well - rather than off in a Siberian corner - making you permanently aware of the web product, even if you're not directly involved in it."

Andrew Higton, a sub-editor at the Daily Mirror in the UK, agreed with Smith's positive feedback. He said that the shift has involved a change in culture but that he has adapted well: he now thinks "print" and  "web" and keeps them quite separate.

Communication is key

I spoke to Mike Van Niekerk, Editor-In-Chief, Online, Fairfax Media in Australia about how he managed his team during the integration process. He spoke bluntly about the difficulties that the company faced in the early days, stating: "About eight years ago, when we introduced online video reporting at theage.com.au and wanted to piggyback on our print entertainment reporters interviewing movie celebrities there was a strong negative reaction. Print staff stopped work for a meeting to reject this approach, and any integration with online in the newsroom. One newsroom leader said, "If I had wanted to go into the TV business I would have joined a television station, not a newspaper"."

Reflecting on these times, Van Niekerk said: "It was entirely our fault for not introducing the changes through proper consultation and explanation, for dealing with the fears - some justified - and misunderstandings of our colleagues."

Lawrence Shaw, an NUJ representative dealing with new media, told me that how media companies are handling their staff through these changes is, "a real issue for the NUJ".  He said: "It is still unfortunate that in many places changes come from on-high with little consultation with staff..."

The lack of communication is not the only problem.

Drop in Standards

A drop in standards brought about by a rush to embrace the new technology is another concerning development at some media organisations. A local newspaper reporter in the North of England reports that he was given a camcorder, told to go into the office broom cupboard, drape some material behind him and simply read his article out straight to camera. Such reports indicate that some media organisations are perhaps missing the point. This new technology can make the news come alive, but it is pointless to use it unless it really contributes to the story.

Moving Forward

I asked Van Niekerk how Fairfax moved past their initial problems, he said: "The most important part of the process has been more effective communication, which is how it should have been from the beginning."

Fairfax Media also utilized the Unions as a method to communicate with their staff.  In 2007, "the Media, Entertainment and Arts Alliance began to take a fairly pro-active approach to understanding and dealing with the changes. The company's journalists as a whole are now more engaged and finding the rewards of new skills and new opportunities."

Van Niekerk said that it is an ongoing process and that they are still working on it, however, the lines of communication between the newsroom and Editors are now open.

Shaw argues that it is best to deal with staff concerns upfront rather than allowing bad working practices and resentment to set in.

It seems clear that just as there has been a synergy between online editions and print editions with newspapers, there needs to be a synergy between editors and their newsrooms. Communication and training are quite clearly the key, and if handled correctly, it allows the newsroom to focus on delivering the news.

Source: National Union of Journalists - Shaping the Future

The 2008 PRWeek/PR Newswire Media Survey found that the job requirements for journalists has changed with the shift from print to online, raising awareness to the commercial side of the business. 1,231 journalists of a variety of media were polled with these findings:

- 57% believe they are being asked to work more today than in the past few years.

- 56% say they are contributing to other mediums, for example, 39% of newspaper journalists have to work on the online version of their publication.

- 67% of newspaper journalists believe that print circulation will decline over the next three years and move to the Internet. 38% of newspaper reporters expect to see "reductions in staff" over the next three years.

- 63% of print journalists believe their publication will survive in the current state of the print industry.

- 91% consider the most important aspect of their work is to "make my publication successful by creating appealing content for its audiences", while to "educate and inform the masses," "break news," and "chronicle events as they happen" came as lower priority. The survey says that this "suggests a significant level of commercial awareness on the part of journalists."

- 70% say public opinion of journalists has gotten worse during the past five years, and 52% believe the general public has a "somewhat negative" opinion of journalists.

- Almost 73% sometimes or always use blogs because blogs can "measure sentiment."

A full review of the survey results will appear in PRWeek this Monday.

Source: Editor & Publisher

In the wake of Rupert Murdoch’s $5.6 billion takeover of Dow Jones, the reactions among the media have been diverse: was it a fatal blow onto a trusted news organization’s credibility, a profitable deal in a struggling industry, a conventional business move that won’t affect the Wall Street Journal’s (WSJ) editorial integrity? Most probably, a little of all of the above. What will become of the Journal’s praised journalism? In addition to international media’s views, the Editors Weblog collected the insight of some top French editors.

Mark Glaser of Media Shift recently compiled a list of ten reasons to be positive about the future of journalism.  With naysayers ready to ring the death knell of newspapers, Glaser says there are plenty of reasons to embrace the Internet and what it can do for journalism.

Africans need to help themselves to achieve transparent, comprehensive reporting, was the conclusion of “Reporting Africa for Africans and the world”, a debate at the 14th World Editors Forum today.

After the opening ceremonies of the 60th World Newspaper Congress, CEO of the World Association of Newspapers, Timothy Balding, gave an update on the state of the global newspaper publishers in his annual World Trends in the Newspaper Industry.

New ideas and change are a necessity but it’s vital to consider all factors and lead from the top.

Tony Dokoupil of CJR Daily recently gave some analysis on the projections of the Project for Excellence in Journalism (PEJ) “State of the American News Media” report, emphasizing the changing, more individualistic role of journalists.

The following is an overview of the US State of the News Media Report’s findings concerning digital journalism. The report defines six key online journalistic qualities that newspapers should be exploiting, and evaluates how well they are currently doing so.

“Is the newspaper industry dying? Not now. On an average day, roughly 51 million people still buy a newspaper, and 124 million in all still read one,” says the US State of the News Media 2007 report. Despite this positive introduction, the report’s findings point towards challenging times for the newspaper industry.

The 4th State of the News Media report, presented yesterday, found that the journalism business is entering a new phase, one of “more limited ambition.” Newspapers have come to realize the changing implications of this new era, but in the absence of clear solutions, may need a visionary industry savior.

The Project for Excellence in Journalism has just released its 2007 State of the American News Media Report. Among its most important findings: most media lost audience this year, and the growth of online news is slowing down. Yet newsrooms are more prepared than in past years to adapt to this time of transition.

How can a multimedia and online-focused publication be so successful in South Africa, a market in which Internet and broadband access are still relatively limited and telecommunications’ costs are excruciating? Matthew Buckland, publisher of Mail & Guardian (M&G) Online, explains how his newspaper used these obstacles to its own advantage.

In what appears to be another attempt to be innovative, the New York Times is joining forces with Microsoft to develop an electronic newspaper reader called Times Reader that will try to capture the feel of reading the print version. The operative phrase here is "attempt to be innovative." Still, there is at least one positive development for the newspaper industry in this attempt.

The third annual State of the News Media report by the Project for Excellence in Journalism details two phenomena crippling the newspaper industry which, through further inspection, are more closely related than they appear. The first, which the report refers to as the “new paradox of journalism,” destroys content. The second, spawned from the Internet, destroys revenues. This may not sound promising. But by understanding, embracing and combining innovative ideas with these perceived destructive forces, newspapers should be able to solidify their futures in the new media economy.

The speculative sale of American newspaper giant Knight Ridder, or break up thereof, does not only reflect years of newspaper circulation slides and huge profit margin demands by shareholders. More relevantly in today's new media world, it demonstrates the original carelessness of the newspaper industry in underestimating the effects the Internet would have as well as the difficulties newspapers currently face in racing to catch up.

The Commonwealth Press Union (CPU) is holding its biennial conference in Sydney, Australia from February 20-22, and includes the Commonwealth's Editors' Forum. 80 to 100 senior editors are attending the sixth forum and all major newspaper groups in the Commonwealth support the conference. Below are a few of the main ideas that have are being discussed.

1.) Websites boost brand loyalty: Publishing a paper's news online is now obligatory, but editors need to clarify certain issues, such as charging for the website, deciding how much content should be published online, and determining what effect the website will have on sales and circulation. Keith Perch, Editor and Managing Director of the UK's Northcliffe Electronic Publishing pointed to a survey of his company's websites which showed that its internet readers were also the biggest readers of the print edition. "It would appear that, for the fans of our newspapers, the websites simply strengthened that loyalty, despite the fact that the content was pretty much duplicated," said Perch. "On the whole people buy the newspaper because they like the newspaper, they use the internet site when it suits them and, in general, it doesn't stop them buying the paper." However, some statistics of completely losing some readers to the internet were still a bit worrisome. To bring them back, Perch suggested that editors rework their display of and distinguish between the content of print and online editions in an attempt to adapt to this changing readership who has become accustomed to the immediacy of online news, something with which print can't compete.