Mainstream Journalism - New Business Model - Lipstick on a Pig

Andrew Fowler: 'Why journalism is in decline' Opinion The Drum By Jessica Tapp Posted 3 Aug 2015, 11:30pm  Mon 3 Aug 2015, 11:30pm Author and journalist Andrew Fowler takes a look at a media industry in flux, and tells The Drum what factors are contributing to a decline in quality journalism. Journalist and author Andrew Fowler says a lack of trust and failed business models are contributing to a decline in journalism. Mr Fowler has outlined the problem in his new book, The War on Journalism - Media Moguls, Whistleblowers and The Price of Freedom. Speaking to The Drum, he said the declining confidence in the media was contributing to a disconnect between the mainstream media and their sources. "People with information very often don't trust the existing news media, they tend to go to people outside," he said. "For example, (Edward) Snowden went to Glenn Greenwald who was a freelancer who then got the story published in The Guardian, but there's a lot of pressure from Greenwald to get that story up before the story finally appeared." The Guardian published a series of Greenwald's articles revealing America's National Security Agency was collecting the phone records of millions of customers of one of the USA's largest telecommunications providers. The leaked documents also showed the NSA was permitted to use and retain information from US communications, including emails and internet usage. "Bradley, or Chelsea Manning as she is now, actually didn't go to the newspapers, she didn't go to The New York Times, she went to this outfit who nobody knew at the time, called Wikileaks," Mr Fowler said. "Wikileaks were the people that actually then did the deal with The Guardian." Mainstream media disconnect Mr Fowler said the way the NSA files were leaked shows the changing relationship in how the media gets its information. "It's an interesting area to look at to understand why those things occurred," he said. "What it shows you is that one of the reasons why the mainstream media is in such a crisis is that people have really lost confidence in it, not only because the money itself has dried up so they really can't fund the kind of investigations that they did in the past, but also because they think that they tend to go downmarket to compete with the internet. "You get clickbait stories ... which really are just trash, and flop." Losing money, losing power Mr Fowler said the drop in profits, particularly for print media, had made it difficult for journalists to fund good reporting. "I think governments and corporate interests have become more and more powerful and more and more controlling of journalists," he said. "As journalists we've become weaker as the rivers of gold, as (Rupert) Murdoch famously called them, have dried up. "Then the governments and the large corporations have really made a great play of that and have fed news organisations pretty easy to digest news that they can run." He said the public was aware of the changing power dynamic. "It's a very difficult situation because there's no money ... so the problem is how do you get out of that issue?" Failing business models Mr Fowler said he wanted to see a new business model to keep funding quality journalism. "Unless you do, the fourth estate which is the fourth pillar that stands against the other three pillars of the realm will fall. And for democracy - and it sounds awfully large call to make - but for democracy it's a really dangerous time," he said.  [Fascism followed by revolution?  lol] "As far as I can see there has been no major investigation of how this failure occurred because most newspapers were in denial until they finally got clobbered with the reality." Echo chambers Mr Fowler blamed pay walls for making it easier for people to seek out the stories that only match their views or interests. "What you want is a mix in the newspaper where you get people reading good, strong stuff like investigations done by The Herald Sun or done by The Age, mixed in with light stories that people will want to read," he said. "The (Financial Review) behind a pay wall is all very well, but I want the Fin Review read by other people than just those people who have blue chip stock. "I don't want this narrow casting because narrow casting means that people live in an echo chamber and that breeds all sorts of problems: extremism, people with prejudice only reading what they want to read, never being exposed to a big idea." But haven't people always read particular newspapers because it aligns with their views? Mr Fowler denied it and said there was value in a diversity of news and opinion. "Sometimes they get surprised." Jessica Tapp is a journalist with ABC's DrumTV http://www.abc.net.au/news/2015-08-04/tapp-why-journalism-is-in-decline/6670076  --------------------- COMMENT New business model?  Lipstick on a pig, more like it. Goodbye fascism lite & hello full-on corporate fascism controlled media and society? Meh, what's the difference?  LOL Seriously, mainstream journalism is deception & has always been deception. The main reason I support journalism is because I want everyone *else* to have a voice (ie public and alternative press), and I don't think you can have that without having a free press.  Freedom of expression and freedom of speech is more important to me, but it's not like you can have those personal and political freedoms without also having a free press.  As for mainstream journalism, that's largely the corporate & government agenda and propaganda voice. No major investigation needed.  See enough mainstream media propaganda in action and read about CIA bribes, journalists obtaining government agency approval before printing, CIA controlled media of the Cold War era, willing newspaper editors obliging the government and so on, and mainstream media cancels itself out. And who seriously wants to know what Rupert Murdoch's or Gina Rinehardt's paper wants to proclaim ... you just read that stuff for bare details and the occasional laugh. Big idea?  Big idea, or big lie?  Think the press is just lamenting that it's harder to pull the wool over everyone's eyes these days.  Not sure how they propose to expose everybody to 'diversity' and 'opinion' when all mainstream output is from the position of the establishment (or a certain brand of smug, sanctimonious, preachy left), which is said to represent the limits of debate.  I'm guessing more and more people aren't interested in what they have to say because the internet gives people options they've never had. Fascists will probably shut down the internet and we'll be stuck with watching the evening news and reading one of a couple of daily newspapers. Don't know how money is made out of news.  News is like tissues.  It's throw-away:  as soon as you have the key facts and the buzz of the newness of it, it's dead news.  PS   I've figured out what I don't like about mainstream media.  Don't like the whole presenter thing and being presented with whatever is deemed 'suitable', being presented with somebody else's agenda, the propriety of it all, the political correctness, the seriousness, the 'we are authorities' play-acting, the entire canned for public consumption fakery of TV news ... as well the fact that you KNOW they and the printed press will never present news that goes against US-allied foreign policy (well, you eventually learn if you bother to look).  But you instinctively know because the story is always the same, the state 'enemies' are always the same etc.  It's all about upholding the establishment position, whatever that position may be. The biggest threat to journalism is government, which is afraid of whistleblowers and of the internet.  The government is cracking down on the media and on civil liberties, to prevent exposure from perhaps a media that now needs to work harder than it has ever done, as it is in competing with a whistleblower publisher (or maybe more), and needs to maybe start looking a little more real? And this talk of 'democracy' is nonsense.  It is, and always has been, a plutocracy. I'm starting to think that any threat to journalism (other than government) is probably hyped up nonsense.  The bulk of the population will always be mainstream media dependent, and I think very few people will ever stick their necks on the block as whistleblowers.   I'm still having serious trouble believing the Defence Dept 4Chan leak story. It's probably a fake, like those false flag ops, to provide a pretext for ever growing controls on the media and the public.  Ummm ... can you have fake court cases?  If you can have faked 'attacks' one must defend with military response, faked  weapons of mass destruction, and faked allegations etc, etc, why not also have yourself some fake court cases? lol  [I've not slept much and I've just bashed this rant out.  So if it doesn't make a lot of sense, that'd be why.  lol]