More than any other medium, print journalism had to adapt-to the new technologies of the Information Age. Among an already elite corps, journalists now distinguish themselves by their online sophistication. That trend will continue while print-media becomes more interactive. ‘Bloggers’ serve a unique niche between print and internet media, and are the latest members of the civil press. They can be the most controversial, too. They often represent only their own views or concerns. So far, blogging has demonstrated the effectiveness of ‘civil media’. Like traditional print journalism, bloggers can have to answer to their content. Their accountability is usually limited to the extent of its exposure though. So is their influence.
Readers may be looking for speculation; information on the kind of things that have yet to catch on but are likely to. Or, they might be looking for stories of heroics or tragedy. Newspapers always were. At least, before the industry had to be restructured after the information the internet revolution could provide. Journalism students worry about the industry that they will inherit more than they probably need to. It is still a viable medium. It was just due for an overhaul. Broadcast radio and television news are probably ahead of newspapers in their restructuring. When they’re done, they will have adopted new formats and strategies to match their new audiences. The media resources that the Information Age leaves in its wake have the ability to develop familiar followings and rivalries. Audiences still can argue, “My news is better than your news!”
For the most part, it’s all the same news. Just a case of how it’s taken. Business can rely on internet speed and still depend on radio for some productivity needs. Radio has the ability to reach the workforce with traffic, scores and breaking news while it keeps its listeners’ interest. TV cannot do that as effectively within all workplace conditions but it has also become an important tool to workforces. It can give more depth to the topics it covers than most mediums. For even more depth, readers can turn to newspapers. Or, research for their selves on the web. It can depend upon the access to media that the workplace allows and the information the workplace requires. In a perfect world, workforces would have access to each within the confines of the industry. In the meantime, they gravitate toward the mediums that yield the greatest productivity.
Newspapers may have been slow to catch-on to the internet’s potential. Future rivals established themselves before newspapers discovered the market for remote access. Newspapers retained old formats and invested in the means of their production. ‘Public Acceptance of New Technologies’ warns that if an industry hopes to “hold new technology at bay, it does so at the risk of damaging its own industry.” Although newspapers may not have actively campaigned against internet technology, their prolonged attachment to older technology ensured that the industry’s restructuring was dramatic. Technology can be useless if you don’t know how to use it. Print journalism learned that after its vulnerability had been exposed.
Business is always about the bottom line, sooner or later. Too often that means sacrificing less viable ‘means of production’ in an attempt to reduce inefficiency. Yeah, some mediums might be better suited to certain businesses/industries than others. Inevitably, they each take an element of productivity with them when they go though. No business should have to sacrifice the newspaper, TV, internet or radio to cut-back their overhead. The corporate information brokers in any industry promise their subscribers that they provide the best information. And somewhere in the competition, what was newsworthy is lost. That illustrates the importance of industry correspondence. It hasn’t really even been pioneered yet. There are corporate in-house and broadcast reports but neither is an impartial enough observer.
What any industry needs in the ‘Information Age’ is insider coverage that cannot be bought. Information is the first thing to be trademarked these days. That’s nothing new but modern technology has allowed information’s exploitation to become an artform. It is the culmination of more than a century of profiting on information and its impact. The press has been credited with enough power to create trends and political influence since at least the Spanish-American War. By nature, readers believe what they see in print. Criminal matters can be tried in newspapers before they ever see a courtroom. Journalists and editors have to answer for their stories but that’s all that really keeps coverage unbiased sometimes. Media moguls have historically been able to sell their agendas to trusting readers if they are willing to pay for its publication.
At its finest, the media acts as a forum for issues that deserve public opinion. ‘The Media and Modernity’ cites issues of the civil rights movement that were “advanced through struggles for visibility in the media.” The same potential to influence the public that can make the media dangerous can make it a powerful weapon for the right causes. Before a story goes to print or ‘copy’, a writer must be willing to sign-off on their responsibility. Then an editor has to be willing to publish or air it. Some stories demand a little justice but ultimately the media has a responsibility to inspire and not incite their audiences.
The principles of the freedom of the press were defended by our first postmaster before the Revolutionary War. Franklin may have witnessed both its power and ability to withstand private media campaigns. Optimists argue that it will withstand the Information Age too, with the right restructuring. The labor force might be overwhelmed by freelance journalists for a while but eventually they might even find work. Any evolving industry requires enough identity to house its workers. So in the meantime, writers everywhere (among others) wait. It’s a lot like in-flight time. It’s a good time to play catch-up. Maybe that’s where trends catch-on? With enough available resources, the demand and the markets that eventually serve it can almost create themselves. All made possible by a little ‘down time’.
Technically, industry down time is an ‘industry recession’. But I think a need for industry coverage results from it. Correspondent coverage of any kind is a limited field in the first place. It becomes more limited with specialization. It’s closer to consulting than it is to journalism, sometimes. Explanations end-up with executives instead of public readerships. Documentary correspondence can have a profound influence while it satirizes industry developments. Satire is an important tool of correspondents. It usually reflects the truth in dosage audiences can tolerate. Wielded proficiently, it is as entertaining as it is convincing. Social narratives depend-upon it.
There’s a very fine (albeit, important) difference between social narratives and commentaries. As a documentary, social narratives are more historical than they are political. Walter Cronkite’s coverage of the Cold War is typical of a social narrative. So were Mark Twain’s accounts of the Civil War and the years that followed it. Both might even agree, ‘those are the times that call for a Tom Savvyer.’ In an interview with CBS, in the years after the Cold War, Cronkite observed that (in reference to his generation and their causes) democracy “did the best they could.” It is often at times like these, when things are at their worst, that times call for that brand of heroics. Sophomoric determination must account for the majority of success in a crisis. Sometimes, I think it is the only way to survive one.
Our government is a pretty good one. Its public works and funding ensure that there are some jobs. When no one else has jobs, the federal government still will. But the government gets hit just as hard by economic crises. Private business has the luxury of declaring bankruptcy. Governments usually have too much invested in existing operations to cash-in and start over under a different name. So they cut their budget until the economy recovers. And they have to adapt-to and adopt new technologies just like private business does. I guess I credit the information revolution for exposing weaknesses in the way we had been doing business. Savvy investors were able to exploit them. Savvy doesn’t always mean honest though.
The news became less important than marketing it. Once upon a time, the press was regarded as a civil branch of the government. The press can be a sometimes ‘radical’, self-righteous, rebellious branch but an effective civil one anyway. With a few exceptions, it cares more about corporate image than it does about an informed public. NPR and PBS (both government subsidized networks) may be the only media enterprises that broadcast solely for the purpose of investing in an educated population. Massive media conglomerations fight for supremacy between themselves but they do it for profit and ratings, not for civic influence. There are legions of would-be loyal readers and viewers that are just looking for a little more truth in the news. The press functions better when it can offer a cause its audience can back instead of an agenda.
One of the most influential forces in the media revolution otherwise known as the ‘Information Age’ has been the National Science Foundation. During the Cold War, according to The Economics of Technological Change, the National Science Foundation was established-to “direct some research, basic and applied, to help bring into being new technology required in the public interest.” More recently, the foundation’s funding of research for viable search engines has resulted in web access for the public. A civil media is a fairly traditional canon of journalism’s but has become more of a reality since on-demand access’s inception. Access on-demand gave audiences a choice. The internet’s ‘on-demand’ individual access to news and entertainment quickly created another popular medium inside the media marketplace. Print and broadcast radio and television have had to re-establish their markets to reflect the industry’s new dimensions in the revolution’s wake.
The new media industry will demand more sophisticated skills as it emerges. Alongside them it will find new ways of employing old skills. Visual elements are a big part of the new multi-media technologies of the information revolution. So is access. Viewers pull up web-pages with links to supporting sites and are more likely to subscribe to those that appeal to their tastes. A good blog site takes a little graphic design, good writing and embedded resource links (at least) before it is competitive. Television will incorporate similar features as it becomes more interactive. Print media will probably undergo the most profound change as it moves toward mobile distribution. Radio’s content doesn’t support as much technology but it could still include links to external sources or weather and traffic feeds.
If you want bylines, print media is still the most likely way for a writer to become famous. Screenwriters are never as famous as their scripts. And radio doesn’t demand much writing for its content. It’s no more likely that you will become wealthy than it is that you will become famous as a writer, either. Wages vary significantly among writers. Royalties and advances are a factor when dealing in creative license. Health care and retirement plans only apply for salaried positions at larger companies. According to the Department of Labor’s statistics for writers, “Median annual wages were $58,740 for those working in advertising, public relations, and related services and $43,450 for those working for in newspaper, periodical, book and directory publishers.”
The deadline is among the factors that define the correspondent’s workplace. Correspondents are the writers most likely to work from an office if they are with a metro bureau but they could find themselves covering events from remote locations just as easily. In correspondent work, stories are everywhere. And then there’s the source. Interviews corroborate a story’s facts. Citation-worthy sources are irreplaceable. Sources are likely to volunteer only the information that supports their views and journalists try to persuade them to reveal more. It’s a diplomatic relationship. Reputations can be an asset or detriment to either a journalist or a source. It depends on the reputation and whatever’s thought of it.
A new age of technology demands a new generation of correspondents and journalists. Some people might argue that no one really needs a reporter. Not with all the personal access available. Sometimes there’s a story that needs to be pulled together by a skilled writer though, if only to put into words what everyone’s already thinking. And more importantly maybe, to document events that unfold for the record. Our history usually serves us better that way. To really capture retrospect, it takes a skilled narrator. Great ones only come along so often. When they do they can preserve a little history with their stories. And if their work is objective and they’re lucky enough, maybe it can influence generations.
Works Cited
CBS News. “Eyewitness to History” New York. CBS Broadcasting Inc., 2009
U.S. Department of Labor. Bureau of Labor Statistics http://www.bls.gov/oco/ocos320.htm. 2010-11.
Mansfield, Edwin. “The Economics of Technological Change” New York. W.W. Norton and Co., 1968.
Thompson, John. “The Media and Modernity” Cambridge, UK. Polity Press, 1995.
Williams, Roger. “Public Acceptance of New Technologies” Kent, UK. Croom Helm Ltd., 1986.
http://goodnevvs.blogspot.com/
bvt vvhatta fvnk do I knovv?, I only vvanna be a 'rock + roll jovrnalist'
ReplyDeleteactvally, that is 'rock + roll jovrnalism' ... bvt, it'z svre 'gonzo'
ReplyDeletegonzo'z really kinda 'fvnny'!
ReplyDeletethx!
ReplyDelete