Investing in Journalism Innovation: towards a petition for Government support for training

Evidence that the local & regional newspaper industry (amongst others) are in crisis isn't hard to find.

Just take a quick glance at the Media Guardian timeline of media job cuts (below). And while, as Ian Burrell pointed out recently in The Independent, not everyone thinks it matters. Others, like me, do.

And in those circles the view that Government has a more active role to play in the way ahead is also gaining support, as recent comments by the culture secretary and the establishment of the new Local Media Alliance) show.

However, while any interventions should necessarily help ensure the industry survives the cyclical economic downturn, that's not enough. The industry needs support for the structural changes essential if it is to thrive in the 'Networked Age'.

Or, to draw on an old adage: Government should not only give the hungry industry some fish and ensure that the legislative environment is conducive for fishing - but it should also help the industry build the knowledge to devise new ways of fishing.

Media job cuts on Dipity.

Training and re-training newsrooms for the (not so) new media media environment is certainly happening (my colleagues and I are engaged in a quite a bit of it ourselves).

But it's not happening enough. And it's not happening fast enough. And, with few exceptions, it's not happening broadly enough - particularly at the higher levels of organisations (as Hugh Stevenson and I have noted before).

With that in mind, I've been circulating an idea amongst some colleagues, which I'm now considering posting as an e-petition to No 10.

But before I do, I'd welcome any feedback or advice on the proposal which would read something like:

"We the undersigned petition the Prime Minister to…enable media companies to invest in building the much-needed capacity to innovate- including editorial and commercial management skills - by providing corporate tax relief for training of up to 1% of payroll per annum.

This investment, which would be subject to review after three years, would supplement, not replace, support for digital skills training available through current initiatives such as Skillset ."

What could this mean?

Well, a back-of-envelope calculation based on the premise that payroll comprises around 40% of the budget of a typical newspaper (cf the Independent). And let's work with a modest operation of 100 people that, using Frederic Filloux's rough calculation, means a payroll of around £5million. That would make around £500 available per person to invest in capacity building.

That may not be a great deal - but, I suspect, that it's a great deal more than most training budgets are likely to have right now. And would go a long way to helping the cash-starved news organisations build their capacity to innovate.

How does that sound?

NOTE: It's probably worth pointing out this is my personal blog and that these views are my own and that I'm am not speaking for my employer. Or anyone else.

Gathering the (South African) Media Milestones

I kicked it off in 1994 with the first edition of Writing for the Media. And continued it with the second edition. But dropped it when I put together the third edition.

But today, after get yet another query about the history of the South African press, I've decided to (re)build the media milestones on Dipity. And to invite others to join the project.

So, if you'd like to contribute, just pop me a note.

Francois N. - All Topics on Dipity.

A response to '‘Four Excuses That Impede Change in Media Academia’

At the edge of the Namib desert where the Swakob River empties, periodically, into the Atlantic Ocean, settlers in 1892 founded a town which many still today describe as 'more German than Germany'.

It's a place where the pioneers, mostly cut off from the developments das Vaterland sought (seek?) to perpetuate the culture as they remembered it.

The architecture, the bakeries and pubs are all wonderful examples of early 20th century Europe and seem untouched by either the changes on that continent or the cultures of the rest of Africa, which lies beyond the Namib desert.

In much the same way, too many media academics that I encounter on both sides of the Atlantic seek to perpetuate the norms and values of a time that no longer exists. And, yes, as Vin Crosbie points out in his column, ‘Four Excuses That Impede Change in Media Academia’ , it's often done with the best of intentions. And not all the outcomes are lamentable either (if you're ever in Swakopmund, try the fine beer and delicious baked goods). But, whatever else it is, it’s not fit for progress.

To change that will not only take a radical review of the curricula, as Vin suggests, but also a revolution of the culture in the journalistic establishment- newsrooms & the institutions that support them. That needs to start with the banishment of the common belief that no one outside the fraternity says anything worth listening to.

Consider, for example, the open disdain with which many journalism trainers (I hesitate using the word 'academics') regard their colleagues in media studies departments, where they do not simply perpetuate 'best' journalistic practice, but dare to examine the consequences of those actions. Similar attitudes apply to those who condescend to consider the market value of journalistic endeavour.

This particular brand of anti-intellectualism, I firmly believe after more than 20 years of working in and with newsrooms and universities in the US, South Africa and the UK, has resulted in the knowledge cul-de-sac that has contributed to the not-so-slow suicide of large sections of the mainstream industry in the US and elsewhere.

So it would be simplistic to suggest that out-moded academic curricula are the consequences of journalism departments that are cut off from the changes in industry. Instead, it's because, much like Swakopmund, the journalistic establishment has long made a virtue of isolating itself from everyone else. And while it was largely a matter of geography for the early setters of that patch of German South-West Africa, for much of the mainstream media industry its mostly a matter of mindset.

Yet another edition of Writing for the Media in the works [and other cliches]

First this: My first writing tutor at university, Rosalie de Rosset, tried to instill in me a phobia of clichés, which she would ridicule without mercy. So it's with trepidation that I ask that you - and she - indulge me in this post

No one can be more surprised than I am (cliché 1) that the text I pull together in those months before South African's first democratic election is still considered useful enough to would-be journalists and trainers that the publishers want yet another edition.

A recent letter from folks at Oxford University Press noted that Writing for the Media 3e is being used at Nelson Mandela Metropolitan University, Central University of Technology, University of the Free State, Johannesburg University, Tshwane University of Technology, University of Pretoria, University of South Africa, Vaal University of Technology, Durban Institute of Technology, University of KwaZulu Natal, University of Zululand, University of Venda, North West University, Cape Peninsula University of Technology and the University of Cape Town.

I'm aware that much, perhaps the most, of the book's value is due to the input from colleagues across the industry in South Africa and further afield. I'll again be knocking on doors for input and, if all goes well, the 4th edition will be published in the months before this country's third general election. A gap of about 14 years.

Of course, a great deal has changed, in the country and in our industry. I’ll certainly be looking more closely at how technology has changed our media landscape and specifically how once-clear divisions between “professional” and “popular” communication merge and blend online as traditional differences between message senders and receivers, producers and consumers are replaced by a vast, fluid, ongoing, multi-voiced discourse (Burnett and Marshall, 2003).

The networked digital environment has meant an end to media forms that are discrete or concrete. With it has come the blurring of the boundaries between journalists and their audiences as millions of individuals and organizations have discovered and begun to exercise the ability to interact and express themselves online. Journalists and audiences are is becoming intertwined in complex and little-understood ways. Tricky stuff.

On the other hand [need to get my clichés quotient up], I’m also mindful of Solomon’s wisdom- "there’s nothing new under the sun" - and will aim to highlight those elements which are constant, such as the human need for news and information that can assist with decision-making and social cohesion.

Clearly, putting together the next edition of this text will be no small challenge. And so these final clichés – which are no less true for that - all comments, suggestions or contributions will be most welcome. My copy deadline is February 2008. So, I, er, we had better get to it.

After the 14th World Editors Forum

Well, it's over. The 14th World Editors Forum and 60th World Association of Newspapers Congress wrapped up in Cape Town with the words, 'See you in Goteborg!'; Sweden's second city and host to the next event.

And perhaps we'll have to wait till then to see the real impact of the four days of presentations (including mine), discussions and deal-making, which organisers say drew 'some 1600' delegates to the Cape Town International Convention Centre.

Some of the key points for me were:

- While most editors now acknowledge the need to take advantage of opportunities that new media channels offer, many are still hoping that they can do that without re-engineering their operations.

- Everyone's grappling with how to make money. Actually, most are trying to figure out how to make as much (or more) money doing what we've always done, just more of it. Of course, bottom line is this: we can't. We either have to change or expand what we do, or change our expectations of the rewards.

- Mainstream media companies used to the push model are grappling with the search-find-share paradigm on the Web, and the particular power of search engines (read: Google).

- Mobile media is mostly seen as channel to push more content, while mobile devices are being used as reporting tools. There's still very little discussion about how mobile technologies can be used to engage in conversation with communities. By that I mean how to connect individuals - not simply how to push content from corporates to audiences or even how corporates can get content from individuals.

- The Declaration of Table Mountain is a reminder for that multimedia doesn't necessary mean a a free press.

On to Gotenborg?

Contenders for the first Dolly's© for the Worst Newspaper Video

Perhaps I should revive my tongue-in-cheek suggestion for the Dolly Awards . Paul Bradshaw has identified some serious contenders for the Worst Newspaper Video category from amongst the offerings of the UK regional press. In the process, his posting reiterates some points I've been making in discussions with traditional newsrooms who including online video amongst their offerings:

• Online video is NOT television. Online is to television what television is to film, what film is to theatre, what theatre is to books... In all cases direct imitation is typically NOT flattering. Online news video is a new genre and it will take some time to establish best practice.
• Training (sufficient and on-going) isn't a nice-to-have, it's essential. Sending out poorly trained staff into the online world is not only potentially embarrassing and demoralising for the ridiculed journalist, it is probably bad for business. It's like trying to sell a bad newspaper through novel promotions: all you're doing is getting more people aware of the poor quality of your offering. After the promotion, they're unlikely to be back.
• Novelty isn't a substitute for quality. Once the novelty of simply having video online wears off, those who are want to compete will need to distinguish themselves in the (highly competitive) online space by exhibiting exceptional creativity and craft. And that, as in any field of endeavour, takes investment.

In the meantime, Paul offers some nifty suggestions:

Rule #1: if you’re aiming to imitate broadcast television, make sure you’ve watched it since the ’80s.

Rule #2: if you use a cloth for a background, make sure you iron it.

Rule #3: tempted to use those fancy transition effects on your video editing software? Don’t.

Rule #4: if you’re going to do ‘green screen’ make sure the green covers the whole background.

Rule #5: don’t start talking to your mate while the camera is still filming.

Rule #6: speak clearly, slow down.

Rule #7: film at a time or place when people are not coming in and out of a door and mumbling to each other out-of-shot

Rule #8: do more than one take.

Hill Hunt added two more:

9. Try being interesting or at least (unintentionally) funny.

10. If you can’t, at least tell us something new - not a list of the bleeding obvious.

Further suggestions - and nominees for the Dolly's© - now being accepted.

Facing the New(ish) Digital Frontier - Mobile Media

The buzz that Google is poised to leap into mobile is growing stronger. It's not surprising, really. Google guru Vinton Cerf has been talking up the importance of mobile phones quite a bit recently saying that the future growth of the Internet lies in the hands of mobile phone users, not computers.

Cerf has pointed out that while the Internet population has exploded from 50 million to 1.1 billion since 1997, it still only reaches a sixth of the world's population. “You will get those other 5.5 billion people only when affordability increases and the cost of communication goes down," said Cerf, 63, who joined Google in 2005 as Vice President. By contrast, analysts say mobile phone connections recently topped 2.5 billion and are expected to reach 3 billion by the end of 2007 . A recent study showed that more than half of mobile phones in circulation were enabled to access data services and that 56% of users accessed at least one data services each a month, up dramatically from a year ago. “The mobile phone has become an important factor in the Internet revolution, " said Cerff.

Mainstream media companies aren't entirely asleep at the wheel.

A study of 38 US news sites published last week as part of The Project for Excellence in Journalism’s 2007 State of the American News Media Report showed that about a third (12 sites) of the sites in the sample allowed content delivery customization, such as RSS feeds, podcasts or mobile phone alerts. According to Visiongain, by 2008, 89% of brands in Europe will use SMS & MMS to reach their audience and 1/3 will spend more than 10% of their marketing budgets on the mobile channel.

Since I'm in the business of helping mainstream media companies develop the capacity to meet the challenges that our industry faces, I've been looking around at some innovations in mobile media and have invited Eamonn Carey from upstart Random Thoughts Media to the 6th Journalism Leaders Forum panel on May 15th . Eomann's work for O2 mobile, sponsors of the Irish national rugby team, should ring some alarm bells with mainstream media groups who are still dithering on their commitment to digital innovation - it demonstrates that there are a host of nimble, new media-christened production and distribution companies who are willing and able to help advertisers engage directly with audiences.

- If you've know of good, bad or brilliant examples of the use of mobile phones by mainstream media, I'd really appreciate the links.
- I'm looking forward to seeing what comes from the link up between media monoliths Media24/Naspers and minos Mxit.co.za . Any ideas?
- For a primer on the subject see 'Mobile and Newspapers - A Quick Lessons' . Be sure to read the comments at the end, too.