Now that I’m the new spokesperson for broadcasting, there’s a few things I should say upfront:
First, thanks to Brendon Burns for his efforts in the portfolio. He and I worked well together; he’s done some fine policy work and has stood up for the craft of journalism and the ethics of public broadcasting.
Second; I believe passionately in the craft of journalism and the importance of public media.
Third: I am also the spokesperson for communications and IT. I see a rapidly changing media landscape and despite the continuing need for good journalism and content, many of the traditional institutions that provide platforms for media are struggling to survive, dispproportionately dominate, or struggle for relevance.
The internet is the key. Whether you work in print, radio or TV, our news is rapidly being delivered via the internet, along with other content, such as music, video, movies and access to opinion and social media.
We are witnessing the rise of the citizen journalist. Blogs, facebook and Twitter are rapidly making their presence felt in how people consume information and communicate. Mainstream (traditional/old) media is struggling to adapt.
A few weeks ago I gave a talk about politics and the internet. I said (because it’s true) that despite the crisis for many media outlets about how to adapt, the content that they produce and the craft they practice is still vitally important.
Consider this:
The paradigm of New Media vs. old Media is now overstated. New Media and Traditional Media need each other to survive.
Blogs still rely heavily on mainstream media for content. A recent study by the Pew research Center found that 99% of stories linked to in blogs came from legacy outlets such as BBC, CNN, The New York Times and the Washington Post.
Two quick examples:
The tragic events in Tuscon on 8 Jan 2011, which killed six and left Congresswoman Gabrielle Giffords fighting for her life -the news broke first through Tweets, blogs and Facebook status updates. Newspapers first put their stories online and then followed with more detailed print editions. Journalists and publications joined and added to the conversation with their own Tweets and Facebook pages. Broadcast and cable TV networks broke the story simultaneously on the internet and their stations.
And then the incredible sequence of events in Egypt, which broke on Twitter (that the Egyptian government had effectively shut down the internet) and sparked a storm of response from within Egypt, and outside. Social media was critical for spreading information,and as an organising tool, but the amazing and admirable efforts of Al Jazeera TV should not go unnoticed.
Of course there were other media outlets, including some of our own, that did a very good job.
What this tells me is that the medium is alive and kicking. It needs propelling into the new century (a decade or so late) in how it embraces new technology, and it needs support. A strong democracy needs strong, independent modern, public media. It also needs a competitive and active commercial media. In a modern context, across all media platforms.
This requires a regulatory framework which spans the traditional telecommunications and broadcasting sectors.
Quality journalism cannot be manufactured in a production line with cheap materials. It’s a product that adds value and should be nurtured and valued in any society. Governments don’t always like it, but they need it, and citizens cannot and should not be without it.
Time for change? This is an opportunity.
And the thing is, it doesn’t have to cost government a lot to make it happen.
Journalism is dying and bloggers are shaping the debate more everyday…
And good job too, the NZ Herald leading various campaigns is a joke…
Whatever to, “I provide the facts and let the public decide”..? This principle is dead and so are the papers as long as they keep trying to tell us what to think…
If you really want to strike a blow for freedom of speech allow us to subject laws that breach freedom of speech to judicial review…
New media have changed how news and other media operate, but older media, radion, televsion and newspapers will continue to be a signifcnat force in one way or another. I watch AlJazeera News Hour most mornings. It has provided new reports, onthe-spot coverage and commentaries, as well as reporting on relevant events being reported on Facebook and Twitter. They have brought together a range of relevant sources in a way only a professional and committed, older-media form, news service can (albeit that they broadcast both on TV and live online. They have a team of investigative reporters and journalists on the ground in the area, producing significant content, in a way no blogger does. Most of the prominent, successful and important bloggers comment on and analyse content that mostly comes from traditional news media.
Remember, Mubarak, in his final,last ditch TV speech, warned Egyptians not to watch (or take no notice of) Satellite TV – this was a reference to AL Jazeera.
I am curious, Clare – what role do you think the government ought to have in broadcasting/media etc?
It seems to me one of the primary reasons why mainstream media continues to be the primary source that you identify Clare is that its joournalists have better access to decision makers, at the time the decisions are being taken. Accreditation to press conferences, one on one interviews or access to closed Court reporting are examples.
This comes down to trust (and a healthy fear that if that trust is broken, the journalist’s credibility and access will be shortlived). It seems to me that that trust comes from two things:
- sign-up to ethical standards (incl some form of sanction for breaking those standards);
- Longevity and continuance trust relationships (e.g. parliamentary reporter with politician).
Both of these are absent in the blogosphere but the rise of the professional/semi-professional blogger (who might survive off advertising, consulting etc rather than as a paid journo) may challenge those assumptions.
But what ethical standards would such bloggers be prepared to adhere to?
There is no doubt that the digital information age is reliant on traditional media. In fact it is a symbiotic relationship right down to the end in the food chain, the blogger. In many respects a healthy and diverse digital response to traditional media is good for all involved. It places checks on disinformation and propaganda. It broadens and develops the story and gives a rounded opinion, often encompassing all extremes of public perception. This can only be healthy in forming a consciousness and opinion that is not reliant on a particular scope of information.
It would appear that many reporters and bloogers only adhere to their own ethical standards, which unfortunately is often not in keeping within the law or good taste. The moralistic shortcomings of a completely un-administered blogosphere are detrimental to all involved within the media circus, including the integrity of traditional sources and politicians. The development of a standard of best practice in regards to freedom of speech also needs some clarification in regard to defamation, privacy and copyright laws. It’s an issue I’m currently writing to the New Zealand Press Council about, so any opinions are most welcome.
I have had no confidence in the integrity of commercial msm for many years when as a journalist/columnist my column was canned after pressure from a major advertiser of whose product I had been highly critical in my columns. That this happened cannot be proved, of course, but so I was informed at the time… And, when what I wrote in my column was controversial, the paper ‘cut’ it to bits, to such an extent occasionally that it made little sense, despite it being written under my by-line and clearly an opinion piece. I rely on RadioNZ and the internet for all my news, views and backgrounders now.
In a way, the Internet revolution in online news resulted due to the failure of traditional media sources.
You only have to watch mainstream televised news bulletins in NZ to understand, why ratings for TV news hours are so low.
DFP over at k1w1bl0g (as I know some of you dont read ‘the other side’ has a really interesting breakdown on facebook / twitter / you tube etc. Well worth a read – go have a look
Nats seem to be more popular online as well.
92/121 MPs are on Facebook
National MPs are the MPs least likely to be on Facebook (only 60% or so are)
86% of female MPs are on Facebook and only 75% of male MPs
John Key has 50,081 “fans” and Phil Goff has 2,334 “fans”
43% of MPs are on Twitter
Top tweeters are Tau Henare on 3,087 and Clare Curran on 3,083
John Key has 15,368 followers on Twitter and Phil Goff 2,397
On You Tube National has had 436,522 video views, Greens 122,887 and Labour 21,530
Clare, your topics are awesome!
These days i don’t even watch the 6 pm news. It is bland and gimmick ridden.
BBC World, RNZ and the internet are where its at.
As for what role should the government serve to bolster journalism and the media? Extend and enshrine freedom of information. Journalism and critical analysis will follow naturally.
Open source. Open government. Open solutions. A new wave of representation?
Sell TVNZ. It’s a joke.
Bolster the efforts of RNZ. Make any gov subsidised journalism be distributable under Creative Commons licenses. More kiwi journalists overseas.
Our interpretation of events are unique and important!
The problem is not with the traditional platforms for news media, it’s the way they have been commercialised. There are some better examples of overseas television news on our TV, compared with the inadequate NZ produced infotainment FTA TV news. Some of the better examples can be seen on Triangle TV everyday.
We need NZ news that isn’t controlled and manipulated by commercial news corporates. RadioNZ is all we’ve got left of a non-commercialised public service broadcast. These corporates are doing their best to dominate online too. It remains to be seen how that struggle will play out, and whether they will be able to push the more critical bloggers into the margins.
I blog about this often. The failure of traditional news. The problem is, you can not rely on the Internet entirely – it lacks a certain credibility.
A nut job such as myself could write what looks like a perfectly reasonable article suggesting that aliens have taken over our government. However, without traditional news channels going up to the mother ship and hopefully (and this is where I think they fail so often) find out why aliens might be so interested in God’s Own.
But I think that traditional media needs to become more traditional. Ask those questions like How, Why, What, When etc. rather than leaving bits out. Is anyone entirely clear on the reasons for the Gulf War? i.e. why did Iraq suddenly decide to invade Kuwait? The reasons are there yet the media failed in making people understand.
It’d be nice if we could take the focus of money off the news outlets – allow them to report on the news rather than desperately trying to find revenue streams.
Agreed, Nevyn – man the w’s and h’s are so important.
Clare,
“…This requires a regulatory framework which spans the traditional telecommunications and broadcasting sectors…”
To me that sounds like a piece of legislation that would be costly, horrendously partisan and wholesomely pointless.
What kind of “regulatory framework” do you intend?
DFTT
Check out the research paper on New Zealand Parliamentarians and Online Social Media from the source:
http://www.parliament.nz/en-NZ/ParlSupport/ResearchPapers/e/8/8/00PLSocRP11021-New-Zealand-Parliamentarians-and-online-social-media.htm
The use of online tools indicates that some government leaders recognise the potential for social media to provide a direct line of communication between “the governed and the government.” However, the ‘digital divide’ can prevent some people accessing the Internet to participate in online democratic activities. Nor does online activism necessarily translate directly into offline action.
Wow…the number of premature conclusions drawn based on you having seen how many pages of the legislation so far?
Relax…LAB actually bothers to use the Select Committee process as it was intended, you’ll get your say
if RNZ had a much better website that would be a very cheap/easy way of improving things substantially.
There is no reason RNZ shouldnt become the first choice provider of linked content to bloggers. however its website is complicated and the stories are summaries, and have no pictures.
This could be changed for a very small amount of money.
Colonial Viper,
Clare has obviously been watching too much of Bomber Bradbury and has gone all subversive on us. This is typical of Labour hobby horse politics playing to the white middle class. How many people in Otara or Porirua are worried about the legitimacy of traditional broadcasting in New Zealand? Sweet f**k all – that’s how many.
Those would be the same people in Otara that John Banks thought wouldn’t be interested in turning out for local democracy.
Perhaps they might surprise us again and enjoy a decent public TV channel broadcasting more Pasifika and Maori focussed political content?