If you follow this blog regularly, or at least over the last few days, you'll have seen a lot of stories about readers abandoning newspapers -- especially highly coveted 18-34 demographic.
But on Tuesday, there was a session in Toronto organized by the Canadian Journalism Foundation that discussed a different approach to journalism -- civic journalism.
The two panelists were Lou Clancy, vice-president of editorial for Osprey Media Group, and Jan Schaffer, executive director of J-Lab: The Institute for Interactive Journalism at the University of Maryland. She also is a former executive director of the Pew Center for Civic Journalism.
Here are some excerpts of a speech that Schaffer gave in Brazil last September. She assures me it covers off much the same ground as her Toronto appearance (and it does).
Civic journalism has focused not only on some problems of journalism, but also possible solutions.
It has sought to:
- Restore good journalistic habits.
- Build connections with readers.
- Get better stories.
- Build better citizens.
It's no longer enough for journalists themselves to think they are doing a good job. Readers have to agree that a free press plays an essential role in our democratic society for journalists to merit their special place.
Civic journalists are motivated by deep concerns about contemporary journalism. Media surveys tell us that the public believes that the lines between reporting and commentary have become blurred; the lines between entertainment and news have become blurred. Journalists seem to be unable to "get it right." The news media are spending more time serving elites than ordinary citizens. People tell pollsters that the media is out of touch with the public. They also say that journalism is motivated by commercial interests, which are driving sensational coverage.
It doesn’t help that reporters have developed some bad habits. We:
- Act rushed
- Hover with our notebooks
- Ask loaded questions
- Expect very fast answers to our questions
- Write down only the quick quote – and stop listening
- Show up only when there are problems
- Sometimes, engage in corrupt behavior.
Civic journalists wanted to see if it was possible to:
- Retain the media’s watchdog role, spotlighting corruption and injustices.
- Abandon the attack dog role that seemed to be just creating a lot of noise in a very noisy media environment.
- Add the duties of a guide dog – we say “seeing-eye dog” -- helping people figure out what kind of roles they could play in a democracy beyond simply casting a ballot.
In other words, could you hold citizens accountable for doing their jobs as citizens, much as you would hold public officials accountable for their actions in public office? ...
The civic journalism toolbox consists of:
- New definitions of “News”
- New sources of News
- New Interactions with Readers
- A Mental Check List of Questions
In terms of a new definition of news, Schaffer offered the following:
- Cover consensus as well as conflict.
- Include solutions and success stories.
- Abandon scorecard journalism. Citizens are not keeping score.
- Make sure we not only get the story right, but that we also get the right story.
For more information on how to do civic journalism, check out this Pew Center tool box.
One important tip (please read the whole speech for details; it's worth it!) is to identify those in a given community who might fairly be called busybodies (Schaffer calls them connectors and catalysts; people without a title but who have their fingers in a lot of pies and who know what's going on in their worlds).
Schaffer also spent some time talking about next-generation civic journalism: participatory and citizen journalism (not contained in the Brazil speech).
Participatory journalism can include things like online 'games' such as balancing a city, state or provincial budget. Schaffer noted that visitors to one news website's game spent an average of 17 minutes on it. In comparison, the average American newspaper reader spends 23 minutes per day with an entire paper.
Citizen journalism means citizens are actively involved in the newsgathering process: Shooting video of a news event, phoning or e-mailing in an eyewitness account of an event. MSNBC has a citizen journalism page. South Korea's Ohmynews, probably the world's most successful citizen journalism venture, celebrated its fifth birthday on Feb. 22.
To a certain extent, blogs can can be included in that -- when they're attempting to perform a legitimate journalistic function.
One can throw in wikipedias and wikinews too.
Schaffer also mentioned some of the hyper-local, commercialized "citizen journalism" news products springing up in the U.S.. They are appearing in both print and online form.
Note: Much of that ground was covered at a conference held Aug. 3, 2004 in Toronto by the Public Journalism Network with the support of the Canadian Newspaper Association. The conference was called Exploring the Fusion Power of Public and Participatory Journalism.
Schaffer gave some interesting examples of newspapers that have attempted to apply civic journalism principles and the positive responses they triggered.
My complaints would be that many of the projects she pointed out are splashy special projects -- not that there's anything wrong with them. :)
But I believe the problem is engaging readers on a day-to-day basis. Almost by definition, you can't do a "special project" every day.
Another question: Should the civic journalism approach be done in conjunction with more traditional journalism coverage of institutions?
By all means, journalists should broaden their range of sources when covering issues and should strive to involve the community more, but that takes time, one of the scarcest resources for the modern-day journalist.
Newsroom staffing in Canada and the U.S. has been been falling for at least the past 15 years. If you're expected to report and write three stories per day, chances are you're going to follow the path of least resistance in doing so.
In an essay for the Nov.-Dec. 2004 Columbia Journalism Review entitled Saving Journalism, Prof. Philip Meyer wrote the following:
A Harvard professor, Michael E. Porter, author of Competitive Advantage: Creating and Sustaining Superior Performance, has described a last-resort business model for companies undermined by substitute technology. He calls it "harvesting market position." Managers do it by raising prices and reducing quality so they can shell out the money and run. I know of no newspaper companies that are doing this consciously, but the behavior of most points in this direction: smaller newshole, lighter staffing, and reduced community service, leading, of course, to fading readership, declining circulation, and lost advertising. Plot it on a graph, and it looks like a death spiral.
Bedtime for now!