“Shall we go back to letting the printers carry swords so that we can succeed by killing off the competition”.
My favourite line of the day!
It was delivered at the News Re:Wired event by UCLAN’s Andy Dickinson in response to a question suggesting the BBC could have its wings clipped in order to protect local newspapers.
But whether it was the BBC’s funding, or the emergence of new sources of news and information such as blogs, there was often a noticeable undercurrent in some journalistic quarters that local journalism was under attack from ‘others’ who provide content for free, threatened in some way which required some intervention from who-knows-where to prevent it being snuffed out.
There was talk about whether there’s ethical issues which need to be considered for those going into ‘competition’ with local newspapers, whether bloggers were more interested in their own profiles than providing news and, yet again, the role of the citizen journalist (a familiar subject on this blog).
Is what ‘they’ do journalism? How is it evaluated? Who makes that judgement? etc. etc.
Personally, I find this an outdated debate but I fear it will go round-and-round until the idea that people can have a ‘virtual life’ and a ‘real’ one as two separate things is finally, belatedly put to rest.
And I found it fairly surprising that some of the same people who’d given up a Thursday to talk about the future, about entrepreneurship, multimedia and social platforms, the very same people who had been welcomed to the event in the morning as”spaghetti throwers” – still get hung up on this.
Is it because local bloggers aren’t paid to publish their work? Does that perhaps lead to a mistrust of their motives?
I will undoubtedly try to unpick some of the issues which underly this fear in future posts (so any help via the comments would be much appreciated), but for now I’ll end with the thoughts of Philip John, who also took part today.
The technical whizz behind the Lichfied Blog may have said it quietly, but it was a point put firmly – he doesn’t want to be a journalist, he simply wants to be part of something which serves his local community.
Dim Sum Digital 
That news years resolution to keep my mouth shut isnt working is it
LikeLike
well it was one of those undo-able resolutions anyway! we like you just the vocal way you are 😉
LikeLike
It seems that at every talk or conference I go to there is a group of people who would like it (namely the future) to go away. It, however, will not. People will do stuff for free (as they always have done, actually) because money isn’t the only motivator to blog. Journalists, and that includes me, have to get with the programme: it now costs nothing to publish. That is both a curse and a blessing: there are more competitors, but you (as an individual) can enter the marketplace on your own terms. Other than that it’s all just pointless, childish waffle, frankly and no manner of intervention is likely to help. What will is journalists – if they believe in what they’re doing – taking the opportunities presented by the web to prove that local journalism can survive.
Perhaps someone can establish ‘why we don’t like the web’ conference so these people have somewhere to shelter from the truth.
LikeLike
what a top idea! just don’t make it an unconference because I don’t suppose there’d be enough sessions to fill a day 😉
on the wider point of motivation though, it deserves more attention. Being respected in a community, organising events, being known for providing links, being a participant in a locality, solving problems, tackling issues etc. etc are all equally viable motivation.
LikeLike
It deserves attention from sociologists, social anthropologists (not to mention economists) and us, I think. If we journalists can motivate unpaid contributors we may find ways to reinvigorate our own roles. Our little project http://grounds.posterous.com is grappling with these very issues, since we would like to attract contributors – perhaps in the way that some tech blogs (SlashDot and TechCrunch, for example) are able. All the rewards you’ve metioned feed into this. And maybe journalists should try to remember the first time they had something published. How did it feel? Why did they do it? Was it for money?
LikeLike
It deserves attention from sociologists, social anthropologists (not to mention economists) and us, I think. If we journalists can motivate unpaid contributors we may find ways to reinvigorate our own roles. Our little project http://grounds.posterous.com is grappling with these very issues, since we would like to attract contributors – perhaps in the way that some tech blogs (SlashDot and TechCrunch, for example) are able. All the rewards you’ve metioned feed into this. And maybe journalists should try to remember the first time they had something published. How did it feel? Why did they do it? Was it for money?
LikeLike
Dare I suggest people are being a little too easily offended. I was at the hyperlocal session. I even asked a question about defining the difference between what Phillip from the lichfield blog described as “active citizens producing media” and “journalists” was. I don’t think one is necessarily better than the other. Difference can exist without being rated. Asking what these differences are and whether they are important isn’t denying the future, it’s engaging with it.
I’m not convinced the now notorioua BBC comment was what it is being represented as. I took it as someone positing a “solution” that can’t be right in order to stimulate debate.
There are genuine questions to be asked about the way various types of communication work. Asking whether free contribution undermines the case for salaried journalists is a legit part of ghr debate. Just as confronting trad practice with new possibility is.
Let’s not reduce the tale of the day to a debate about ‘old’ v ‘new’ media. It was si much more than that, as Grdg Hadfield’s excellent closing comments showed.
LikeLike
I agree that it to report it as an old vs new media does not do justice to the day. And I second what you say about Gregs comments. I also agree that you can ask about the differences without rating. I wish that question of the difference between “active citizens producing media” and “journalists” was one that media spent more time trying to answer rather than simply telling the “active citizens producing media” why they aren’t journalists.
I also think that exploring if “free contribution undermines the case for salaried journalists” is valuable question to explore. But in the context of the debate (and the way the question was pitched) it isn’t the job (or responsability) of hyperlocal sites to do that. They don’t have anything to do with that other than use a model/practices that mainstream journalism thinks is a)a possible solution to problems (it isn’t) b)the reason they are in the shit (it isn’t). In fact the worst you could say about them is they are the effect not the cause.
In that respect I can see why the crowdsourcing seminar fell in to the debate it did. Soliciting content from users to use in a publication (usg/community etc) does undermine the case for journalists when done badly. But that is something different from hyperlocal as it was presented in the session.
LikeLike
Dare I suggest people are being a little too easily offended. I was at the hyperlocal session. I even asked a question about defining the difference between what Phillip from the lichfield blog described as “active citizens producing media” and “journalists” was. I don’t think one is necessarily better than the other. Difference can exist without being rated. Asking what these differences are and whether they are important isn’t denying the future, it’s engaging with it.
I’m not convinced the now notorioua BBC comment was what it is being represented as. I took it as someone positing a “solution” that can’t be right in order to stimulate debate.
There are genuine questions to be asked about the way various types of communication work. Asking whether free contribution undermines the case for salaried journalists is a legit part of ghr debate. Just as confronting trad practice with new possibility is.
Let’s not reduce the tale of the day to a debate about ‘old’ v ‘new’ media. It was si much more than that, as Grdg Hadfield’s excellent closing comments showed.
LikeLike
I agree that it to report it as an old vs new media does not do justice to the day. And I second what you say about Gregs comments. I also agree that you can ask about the differences without rating. I wish that question of the difference between “active citizens producing media” and “journalists” was one that media spent more time trying to answer rather than simply telling the “active citizens producing media” why they aren’t journalists.
I also think that exploring if “free contribution undermines the case for salaried journalists” is valuable question to explore. But in the context of the debate (and the way the question was pitched) it isn’t the job (or responsability) of hyperlocal sites to do that. They don’t have anything to do with that other than use a model/practices that mainstream journalism thinks is a)a possible solution to problems (it isn’t) b)the reason they are in the shit (it isn’t). In fact the worst you could say about them is they are the effect not the cause.
In that respect I can see why the crowdsourcing seminar fell in to the debate it did. Soliciting content from users to use in a publication (usg/community etc) does undermine the case for journalists when done badly. But that is something different from hyperlocal as it was presented in the session.
LikeLike
Same old, same old. This is one pointless debate that refuses to shut up and go away. IMO, hyperlocal is definitely where it’s going and there’s a place for bloggers there. Andy said on his own blog that snappers were moaning that “anyone with a camera thinks they’re a photographer and they’re not” to which he replied “er, yes they are” – Andy is right. Ok, so bloggers may not have quite the same skills or critical faculties but that doesn’t mean they can’t report. And with local papers collapsing, we need bloggers to plug gaps. We should be looking for ways for hacks and bloggers to work alongside each other, not wasting energy on such hot air debates.
LikeLike
Just to clarify, it wasn’t a snaper who said the anyone with a camera line, it was a journo. The line continued with anyone with a pen is not a writer…you know the rest. It’s a shame when all we are apparently left with is defending job descriptions.
But the session, and Phillips input in particualar(it was a great for us to hear it from someone outside the echo chamber) highlighted one clear thing. The only people interested in questioning the motives and impact of hyperlocal/bloggers and social media in this context are journalists. Those interested in the models are worried about sustainability. Those interested in the output are interested in their own areas and just do it. Few if any see any connection to the mainstream media at all.
LikeLike
Same old, same old. This is one pointless debate that refuses to shut up and go away. IMO, hyperlocal is definitely where it’s going and there’s a place for bloggers there. Andy said on his own blog that snappers were moaning that “anyone with a camera thinks they’re a photographer and they’re not” to which he replied “er, yes they are” – Andy is right. Ok, so bloggers may not have quite the same skills or critical faculties but that doesn’t mean they can’t report. And with local papers collapsing, we need bloggers to plug gaps. We should be looking for ways for hacks and bloggers to work alongside each other, not wasting energy on such hot air debates.
LikeLike
Just to clarify, it wasn’t a snaper who said the anyone with a camera line, it was a journo. The line continued with anyone with a pen is not a writer…you know the rest. It’s a shame when all we are apparently left with is defending job descriptions.
But the session, and Phillips input in particualar(it was a great for us to hear it from someone outside the echo chamber) highlighted one clear thing. The only people interested in questioning the motives and impact of hyperlocal/bloggers and social media in this context are journalists. Those interested in the models are worried about sustainability. Those interested in the output are interested in their own areas and just do it. Few if any see any connection to the mainstream media at all.
LikeLike
Isn’t anyone unpaid in any profession an amateur? Any blogger unpaid is an amateur journalist, any photographer unpaid is an amateur photographer.
Whilst there is the unfortunate association of ‘not being as good’ with the word amateur, anyone with any common sense knows that is not necessarily the case.
I would think that journalists with real vision and passion for their profession would welcome the increasing power of the blogger as hopefully it will force the ‘professional’ journalists who are incapable of writing truthful or even well-written articles back out and increase the quality of journalism overall.
LikeLike
Isn’t anyone unpaid in any profession an amateur? Any blogger unpaid is an amateur journalist, any photographer unpaid is an amateur photographer.
Whilst there is the unfortunate association of ‘not being as good’ with the word amateur, anyone with any common sense knows that is not necessarily the case.
I would think that journalists with real vision and passion for their profession would welcome the increasing power of the blogger as hopefully it will force the ‘professional’ journalists who are incapable of writing truthful or even well-written articles back out and increase the quality of journalism overall.
LikeLike
The argument about journalist or good-natured citizen is somewhat blurred on The Lichfield Blog, given that I’m technically both!
LikeLike
The argument about journalist or good-natured citizen is somewhat blurred on The Lichfield Blog, given that I’m technically both!
LikeLike