New toys

“Journalism? Isn’t journalism dead?”

The dreaded matter-of-fact and often condescending statement I am occasionally greeted with when I inform a person about my choice to study journalism at QUT. What do you say to that? Journalism, or at least what we have grown up (in the 90’s) understanding journalism and news to be, has indeed seen better days. As reflected in newspapers struggling sales, closure of smaller publications and absence of poorly aimed newspapers on my lawn, the old reliable family van that is newspapers has been replaced with the digital medias far shinier Hummer.

(This decline in newspaper consumption and migration to digital news can be seen/decoded in the graphs provided in this Economist article…obviously included for the benefit of any brain surgeons. They are colourful though!)

In truth the pile of discarded half-read Australians hasn’t sat on our kitchen table in recent times nor the familiar ABC news jingle played on the TV as it previously did at 7p.m. daily. Instead we see the rise to prominence of online news, including blogs and even social media, becoming significant contributors (arguably the most significant in student life) as to the direction and consumption of the news.

But does this new digital era truly mean the end of your friendly neighborhood journalist - the mystical figure we have for so many years trusted to uproot news and force those in power to be accountable? Have citizen journalists and tweeters stolen the niche role we depended on this profession for and made them obsolete?

Professor of Journalism, Media and Communications Brian McNair argued that despite the decline in newspaper circulation journalism was not dead but rather that consumers were just changing platforms as news evolved alongside societal trends.

Professor McNair, obviously a fan of the online mode, outlined advantages such as immediacy, openness and transparency, diversity, interactivity and participation in the consumption of news being moved online.

While I agree with him on these advantages in some ways I believe that the dependency on the Internet for news has the potential to lead us, as an aspiring “informed” society, astray.

Positives:

In my opinion online journalism’s greatest strengths are the diverse range of opinions it offers, (although I’d happily just have Kerry O’Brien come to my house and tell me his version of the news every day…) as well as the evolution it’s beckoned as to how consumers interact with the news. I strongly believe that by giving people better opportunity to voice their own opinions and to participate in the shaping of the news we are, as a community, exposed to more diverse view points as well being empowered ourselves with stronger voices. Even with these opportunities sometimes I feel frustrated and helpless watching the news, the capability to go on to ABC forum’s and pick fights will somewhat subside the red anger flashes. Hopefully this too allows journalists to better understand what we as a society expect from them and the angles in which we expect them to cover news.

Negatives:

I feel as if I might be putting all of my conversational points in the first week so will briefly outline some things I believe could be negative about online journalism being the primary mode of news consumption and discuss them further in future posts.

· Immediacy – the pressure for journalists to race others to break news – how will this affect the quality of news? If this does eventually lead to the failing of a news organisation how will this affect the public's trust in the news provided to them?

· While the digital world does encourage further openness and transparency it also lacks the traditional systems put in place by traditional journalists to ensure accountability – how can we trust the integrity and accuracy of the information?

· Quality of news – There is no question that the traditional role of journalists as the 4^th estate has been diluted by consumerism and the war for ratings – with the further choice granted to consumers online about what they are interested in (surprisingly this not being world affairs, politics, business) how will journalists respond? Will the quality of political coverage die and leave those of us who are interested ignorant?

· Another problem with immediacy is how it might force journalists to compromise their responsibilities as not only news gatherers but also gate keepers, analysts and critics – will the struggle to produce up to date news mean thought provoking reflection of the information might be lost?

I haven’t yet made up my mind as to whether I necessarily think that online journalism is a positive or negative. Obviously traditional journalism’s has proven, even in recent weeks they will not be winning any integrity awards, but I cant help but sometimes think that perhaps the devil we know might be better than the devil we don’t.

As the dream of the cluttered desk in the busy newsroom, amidst the hum of presses, slowly fades it's hard not to feel a pang of regret. But as a part of the increasingly exclusive club of those who still love the smell and sound of the newspaper especially whilst spread out and sometimes (most of the time) hung-over on a Sunday afternoon I will continue to pray that print never truly dies…I’ll at least still continue to visit it at the hospital.