Unpublished editorial

Editorial: Amateur hour in the fourth estate
May 7, 2009
By Laura Dannen

It was a fine day for sound bytes at Tuesday’s Senate hearing on the future of journalism –- exactly what you would expect from a panel of former journalists and publishers. As Sen. John Kerry, chairman of the Senate subcommittee on Communications, Technology and the Internet, suggested print news may go the way of the dodo, bloggers all over the country posted, tweeted and Facebooked their favorite quotes as they watched the hearing live on CNN.com. I know –- I was one of them.

Does my blogging inadvertently reinforce Kerry’s point? I am, after all, a professional, albeit freelance journalist who rushed to post something casual online rather than submit a thoughtful article to a print publication. In doing so, I didn’t double-check my quotes or fact-check the veracity of any statements. I knew better, but I was in a self-imposed rush, with nothing other than a bad Internet connection stopping me from “publishing” on my blog.

We all want to be the first to break news to our audience of one or 1,000. Therein lies one of the greatest unsolved problems of converting mass media from print to online: maintaining accountability. In the race to produce, are we skipping some of the rules? No matter how well-trained a journalist might be, how many professional degrees held, Pulitzers won or clips clipped, the lure of journalists’ manna –- to break news –- can compel even the best to do their worst. It’s not the endangerment of newspapers we should fear, but rather the loss of their standards for fair and accurate reporting.

The queen bee of bloggers, Arianna Huffington of The Huffington Post, reminded the Senate subcommittee, “Ubiquity is the new exclusivity.” Free online news is particularly appetizing when The New York Times decides to charge $2 for its daily paper and an ungodly $6 for its Sunday edition, banking on affluent, engaged readers to stay committed to its paper product.

Will such exclusivity of readership be the “new deal” of newspapers or just a finger in the dike? Quality stories are no more confined to paper than to television, radio or the Internet. But as the delivery of news continues to be democratized, the same should not be true of its creation. Anyone can be a “citizen journalist” and break news, but how many can truly report it?

David Simon, a former Baltimore Sun reporter and creator of HBO series “The Wire,” told the committee, “The very phrase ‘citizen journalist’ strikes my ears as Orwellian.” Now, that’s a little harsh. At their core, citizen journalists are eager members of a community trying to spread the “news” as they define it. The same could be said of a gossipy knitting circle at the local library. Ultimately, they are amateurs –- and the fourth estate deserves better than that. Would a citizen journalist sit through weeks of drawn-out city council hearings? Would they embed with a unit in Iraq? Conceivably, these people have jobs, families –- lives dedicated to other pursuits. Citizen journalists will not be the downfall of our free society, but they should not be relied upon as the key components of journalism’s new business model. So who should?

Answer: all those trained and freelancing professional journalists, blogging out of boredom. By one count, there were at least 12,500 laid off from U.S. newspapers in the last two years. Quality investigative journalism –- part of what Simon calls “high-end journalism” –- is still a necessity for the well being of our democracy, but newspaper owners do not hold the patent on high-end journalism. The skill sets of editors and reporters are easily transferable, as long as someone pays to convert the medium from print to online.

Consider innovation: A quick check of journalismjobs.com would show that New York-based start-up Patch Media (Patch.com) is hiring (!) reporters and editors in New Jersey and Connecticut right now. Its model for community news blends traditional reporting methods –- contributors in council meetings, at the police stations, at Little League games –- with new media, all while a professional editor looks on.

Patch is online, free to use, and a formula that could work in every town in America. Former Time Out New York editor Brian Farnham serves as editor-in-chief, recruiting local emissaries who are “passionate –- about the Internet, about journalism, about doing a job right.” (Don’t worry: they also need a firm grasp of AP style, according to one job posting. Journalism-school degrees are a plus, too.)

The $64,000 question: who will pay for it? Patch Media is backed by Polar Capital Group, a private investment company. The model is growing… slowly. Patch is setting up shop in nine communities, including South Orange, Scotch Plains, Millburn, Maplewood, Summit, Westfield and Ridgewood. However, the news coverage isn’t comprehensive (it leeches from the Star-Ledger) and advertisers have yet to invest. Still, this model does what many publishers loathe to do: look forward, not backward. The newspaper industry could try many of the tactics recommended at the Senate hearing, such as giving newspapers non-profit status or rallying each publisher to charge for online subscriptions. Does that help journalism grow, though?

Or would we all be better off if newspapers and start-ups joined forces? As former Washington Post managing editor Steve Coll noted at the hearing, we need to protect the public interest by preserving the fourth estate. To do so, I say we invest in entrepreneurial models that shift newspapers’ resources, talent and experience online. Hire back the unemployed reporters and editors and have them teach a merry band of citizen journalists how to report. Bring new credibility and integrity to online news.