The future of Journalism

 Part 1: Clay Shirky lecture

Go to the Nieman Lab webpage (part of Harvard university) and watch the video of Clay Shirky presenting to Harvard students. The video is also available on YouTube below but the Nieman Lab website has a written transcript of everything Shirky says. Clay Shirky on internet issues facing the Newspaper Industry

Play the clip AND read along with the transcript below to ensure you are following the argument. You need to watch from the beginning to 29.35 (the end of Shirky's presentation). Once you've watched and read the presentation and made notes (you may want to copy and paste key quotes from the transcript which is absolutely fine), answer the questions below:

1) Why does Clay Shirky argue that 'accountability journalism' is so important and what example does he give of this?

2) What does Shirky say about the relationship between newspapers and advertisers? Which websites does he mention as having replaced major revenue-generators for newspapers (e.g. jobs, personal ads etc.)?

3) Shirky talks about the 'unbundling of content'. This means people are reading newspapers in a different way. How does he suggest audiences are consuming news stories in the digital age?

4) Shirky also talks about the power of shareable media. How does he suggest the child abuse scandal with the Catholic Church may have been different if the internet had been widespread in 1992?

5) Why does Shirky argue against paywalls? 

6) What is a 'social good'? In what way might journalism be a 'social good'?

7) Shirky says newspapers are in terminal decline. How does he suggest we can replace the important role in society newspapers play? What is the short-term danger to this solution that he describes?

8) Look at the first question and answer regarding institutional power. Give us your own opinion: how important is it that major media brands such as the New York Times or the Guardian continue to stay in business and provide news?

Part 2: MM55 - Media, Publics, Protest and Power

Media Magazine 55 has an excellent feature on power and the media. Go to our Media Magazine archive, click on MM55 and scroll to page 38 to read the article Media, Publics, Protest and Power', a summary of Media academic Natalie Fenton’s talk to a previous Media Magazine conference. Answer the following questions:

1) What are the three overlapping fields that have an influence on the relationship between media and democracy?

Three overlapping fields that have an influence on the relationship between media and democracy are the following: the political, economic and journalistic fields

2) What is ‘churnalism’ and what issues are there currently in journalism?

Churnalism is the cut and paste practice of journalism whereby there is a greater use of unattributed rewrites of press agency or public relations material. 

The current issues in the journalistic sphere, specifically the corporate news world is that it's now more difficult to maintain profit margins and shareholder returns unless they employ fewer journalists. Resulting in more insecure and short term contracts but also fewer journalists with more space to fill in less time.

3) What statistics are provided by Fenton to demonstrate the corporate dominance of a small number of conglomerates? 

Just three companies control 71% of UK national newspaper circulation while only five groups control more than 80% of combined online and offline news.

4) What is the 'climate of fear' that Fenton writes about in terms of politics and the media? 

Politicians are fearful of career-wrecking and life- ruining negative publicity, along with damage to their parties’ chances of re-election. They also avoid certain areas of public policy, for fear either of hostile reporting or media owner conflict, creating an environment where politicians are more likely to discuss populist policies.

5) Fenton finishes her article by discussing pluralism, the internet and power. What is your opinion on this crucial debate - has the internet empowered audiences and encouraged democracy or is power even more concentrated in the hands of a few corporate giants?

I think the internet has empowered audiences and encouraged democracy, as 'we the people' are able to hold our governments and its officials to account without the sugar-coated scrutinisation of the press. As our governments work for us therefore with it's electorate being able to hold them to account we are able to address and scrutinise them directly. Despite the lording presence of news and social media conglomerates today this does not impact the democratic mandate because these news conglomerates need the people just as much as we need them for information, therefore this transactional relationship is beneficial for both.