As I was trying to explore the idea of journalism for the post-pandemic era, there was disturbing news of more job losses in the news media. Those who have been tracking the changes in the newsroom and the job losses in the news industry since the COVID-19 outbreak came up with a stark question: does the re-imagination of journalism mean salvaging the profession without journalists?
The extent of the problem
While the reduction in the workforce is real, editors and media managers have a different understanding of the situation. They argue that the effort is to save as many journalistic jobs as possible despite the terrible economic situation. Some readers were not comfortable with the fact that I cited research from Western universities to build my arguments. It remains a fact that systematic studies of the transformation of newsrooms at the time of the pandemic and the economic meltdown are being done by some of the major universities of the world. I mentioned the specific cases of job losses in the BBC and The Guardian because they represent different business models. The BBC with its licence fees and The Guardian , which is owned by the Scott Trust Limited, have an additional revenue stream that is not subject to the vagaries of the market. The examples provided were meant to explain the extent of entrenchment of the financial crisis in the media industry.
The idea of re-imagining journalism for the digital age is at least three decades old. From the creation of the MIT Media Lab in 1985 to the controversies it generated for accepting financial support from the disgraced Jeffrey Epstein, the task itself has been on a roller-coaster ride. We have always gone one step forward and two steps backward. For me, it is clear that re-imagining journalism is neither a business strategy nor an attempt to apportion blame on technology disruptions. The attempt is to widen the scope of the discussion and include readers as key partners in this important democratic task.
Some readers ask: is it necessary to go back in time to recollect the observations of Benjamin Franklin and Mahatma Gandhi to address a contemporary issue like re-imagining journalism? Given the centrality of credible information for the survival of our democratic institutions, it is important to know the history of our institutions and how they were built. The discussions and reflections that have gone into the making of modern journalism are significant, and it is important to know the past to define our future.
For instance, is it possible to re-imagine the purpose of journalism without remembering the short monograph, ‘A Test of the News’, by Walter Lippmann and Charles Merz published in 1920? They wrote: “It is admitted that a sound public opinion cannot exist without access to the news. There is today a widespread and a growing doubt whether there exists such an access to the news about contentious affairs. This doubt ranges from accusations of unconscious bias to downright charges of corruption, from the belief that the news is coloured to the belief that the news is poisoned. On so grave a matter evidence is needed.” Insouciant suggestions fail to recognise the building blocks of a public information ecosystem because they are made without adequate evidence.
A viable model
It is important for us to keep in mind what journalist and media teacher George Brock said about the nature of the news business. He said: “News media does not follow a master narrative or plan because it involves connecting two elements: the person or group with something to tell and the people who are interested enough to hear it.” How do we identify relevant and credible information from the vast amount of material on the Internet — through which, according to one study, nearly five exabytes of information courses through in just a day? This, according to technology experts, is the equivalent of 40,000 two-hour movies per second. The idea is to come up with a viable model that takes into account the fact that contemporary news negotiates a complex web of partisan politics, technology, capital and a fundamental human desire for an egalitarian world.
I recognise the limitations of a weekly exchange of 700-odd words to address an issue of immense gravity, but will try and wrap up this series next week.
readerseditor@thehindu.co.in
