There has been a spate of grim news about the
news media in recent months, with layoffs and newsroom closures from
coast to coast. It’s clear Canadian journalism is in a perilous state.
Less clear is what can be done about it.
I’ve spent much of the last year talking to
people both inside and outside journalism about the threats to its
future and how they might be addressed, courtesy of a fellowship from
the Public Policy Forum. While those conversations did not reveal a
magic solution to journalism’s woes, they exposed a few salient facts
often glossed over or ignored in the search for solutions.
Serious journalism has no future in Canada unless the following are not just noted but understood:
1. It’s not just journalism
What do Canadian journalists have in common
with the dabbawallas (lunch box delivery men) of Mumbai? In both cases
the industry they work in has been upended by information technology,
changing not just how product is delivered, but who pockets the most
money in the end. Similar restructuring has taken place in the music,
accommodation, taxi and even porn video industries. Banking is next.
Journalists might chafe at the suggestion that theirs is just one among
many industries to be drastically rearranged by the internet and a
growing array of digital tools. The point is that powerful, global
forces that transcend national borders are at work. Any solution to
journalism’s problems in Canada has to take this into account.
2. Direct subsidies won’t work
Canadians tend to look to their governments
for help when an industry is in trouble. Bombardier is a case in point.
The call for government subsidies to journalism is part of this trend.
The Nordic model is cited. Yet the global forces noted above are driving
down newspaper readership in print and online in the Nordic countries
despite government support. There may well be solutions that involve
government. Given how many people use social media to get their news,
educating Canadians about their digital privacy would be a good start.
Any serious discussion about the government’s role should also include a
debate about the future of CBC and Radio Canada.
3. Journalists are no longer the gatekeepers of information
No one needs journalists any more to get their
message out. Anyone with access to the internet or social media can
talk directly to their intended audience. Similarly, journalists are not
the only way governments, businesses and other groups can take the
pulse of Canadians. There are plenty of digital tools for that. This has
changed irrevocably the status and role of journalists. Yes, they are
needed more than ever to shed light in dark corners and to analyze
events, answering the crucial question: What does this mean to
Canadians? But they are sharing space they once thought was their own
with an ever-expanding number of voices that they have to both
acknowledge and in some cases involve in their work. This likely means
fewer journalism jobs.
4. The tech giants are both an opportunity and a threat
In the last year all of the major tech firms
have launched new ways of distributing news to their users. Twitter,
Facebook, Google, Snapchat, Instagram and others want content their
users can easily read, view or listen to while remaining inside their
app (as opposed to being redirected to the site where the item was
created). Newspapers, radio and television firms want new audiences for
their work. It would seem to be a marriage made in heaven. But there are
drawbacks for the news media firms. They risk losing control of how
their work is distributed, an erosion of their brand and the loss of
additional ad revenues created by users who come to their sites and
click on other stories, videos and podcasts. Partnering with tech giants
could be their salvation or the beginning of the end.
5. The audience has changed
It’s widely known that the audience for
journalism has moved online and increasingly onto smartphones. This
changes how people want their journalism — it must be easy to digest on a
small screen — and when they want to look at the news — whenever they
feel like and often in short bursts throughout the day. These are
structural issues that while difficult for traditional media firms to
cope with are not impossible. But one change that is not widely
appreciated and more difficult to deal with is the desire to be involved
in the creation of journalism in ways that were unimaginable before the
advent of the internet. Audiences want a relationship. For journalists
and media outlets used to thinking in terms of delivering a product,
this requires a total rethinking of their role.
In an age where information floods in from
every direction there is still a need for journalism that makes sense of
it all. But any viable solution to the industry’s current woes has to
take into account the changes wrought by information technology on
journalists and their intended audience. This should be the starting
point of any serious discussion about the future of journalism in
Canada.
Madelaine Drohan
is Canada correspondent for The Economist and former columnist for the
Globe and Mail. Her report, “Does serious journalism have a future in
Canada?,” written as the 2015 Prime Ministers of Canada Fellow at the
Public Policy Forum, was released March 14.
