News Wars...

In 2007 the PBS show Frontline produced a multi-part series "News War" which investigated many facets of news as it adapts to changing media outlets and demands. Although the series is old by common standard, its content is still very, very relevant. I highly recommend that you follow the link and view some or all of it. It is split up into short bits (5-10 minutes) that make it easy to choose whichever part interests you most (a news-personalization concept that I will pry another time). This blog is a reflection and response to "Part 3" (segments 16-25) which focuses on the changing relationship between the Internet, news-consumers, news owners and traditional news media.

This response is my perspective based opinion (very inclined to change; given new insights), and I highly encourage you to give me yours. I would like to get comments and suggestions about what you, consumers, bloggers, journalists, media users, think about this new era in news.

Traditional news has reached a point where survival is becoming increasingly dependent on its ability to branch out across multiple media. Traditionally, news was what you needed to know combined with what you wanted to know. It was organized, fairly weighted information for the consumer to digest and act upon. Reporters were not the "face" of news, they were the medium through which it was provided to the public.

In this era of citizen journalism, instant feed information, celebrity journalism and multi-media sourcing, "news" is blurring and shifting with "entertainment" because the line between need and want is blurring and shifting.

Traditional journalism is dying because the demand and respect for it is fading, its resources are declining and, as the "Murrow" generation is slipping away, fewer journalists are entering that role. Newspapers are especially affected in two fronts: Money and demand.

Traditional consumption is declining because budget-cuts are reducing the quality of newspapers, people are turning to multi-media sources that are easier to control and personalize, and the "Murrow" generation is shrinking.

Advertisers are shifting their money to the web because it reaches more people and is cheaper. As newspapers become publicly owned, stocks holders are driving higher profit demands and budget cuts than in the past.

Traditional news will always have a place, it will be controlled more by consumers. Consumers want the news choices they want, when they want it, and nothing else. Most news sources have already begun the shift to on-demand availability, and those who do not will struggle to keep-up and eventually sink or swim.

I'm not exactly sure when this "news war" began, or when it will end. Advertising and for-profit-ownership have played the largest hand for the longest time, and they became really influential when the standard of journalism "as a public service" faded. Then the consumer demand for news shifted more when the Internet stepped in and offered consumers the control over when, what, how and through whom content is provided.

The news used to be controlled by the news sources. Now it is controlled by advertisers, profiteers, celebrities and most importantly, YOU. With the Internet, you can create news and post it from anywhere about anything. You don't need a degree in journalism, or a production or publication crew or an editor. You can post whatever you want, and no one can stop you.

Consumers are controlling supply and demand. If the demand is not met, consumers have the power to change the supply, by creating their own. This is evident in the increasing influence bloggers have over mainstream media. Bloggers and citizen journalists have a place in journalism. They are becoming the checks and balances of mainstream media, like it is of government and business. Could this be because mainstream media is no longer run as a public service but as a business for profit itself?

Bloggers are useful, but they, as a whole, are not a reliable, consistent and unbiased medium. Each individual has an agenda, which is not necessarily centered over journalism; which is good. Comment is very important too. However, it is often difficult for a news consumer to discern a unbiased journalism blog from a commentary one, especially when they are presented in a "news" format.

Consumers may want what they want- and they should get it. But someone has to make a point to inject some of what they need too. Traditional news sources will have to find a way to adapt to this new era, but they will also need to maintain their truth-telling integrity. Perhaps, with its freedom from the control of advertisers and public ownership, citizen journalism networked through trained citizen editors is an answer. Is it possible?