Thursday, October 22, 2009

What will the future of journalism look like?

If you follow CityDesk, the blog over at the Washington City Paper, you've likely seen posts discussing revenue models for journalism. By revenue model, I really mean the City Paper wants to know how they can charge for content.

Like it or not, it's not a ridiculous question. The current recession aside, the future is grim for any news organization that depends on advertising revenue to survive. That model is falling apart and a whole lot of people, including those with impressive credentials, are struggling to develop a new one.

City Paper editor Erik Wemple asked yesterday, "what about alt-weekies?" Wemple was referring to a Columbia University Graduate School of Journalism report, "The Future of American Journalism." The report was written by Leonard Downie, Jr, former executive editor of thw Washington Post, and Michael Schudson, a Columbia journalism professor. The aim was to outline ways to "save" and promote journalism, especially local, community-oriented news.

Downie and Schudson look at a whole bunch of possible paths for the future, including small-scale independently organized news sites, and blogs. Most of these options, though, fall short in providing what is needed. Also, as Wemple notes, major city alternative weeklies are ignored.

In many cases, alternative weeklies provide excellent coverage of local news, especially politics. For as long as I've lived in DC, Loose Lips has been the go-to source for political news. I would say it's indispensable. I'd hate to see the City Paper disappear. It fills an important void. However, a paper that is distributed for free and has even a small staff, is going to struggle to stay afloat funded only on advertising.

What about blogs? They vary on how well and in-depth they report on neighborhood issues. Some bloggers love attending ANC meetings and getting out there asking people questions and sorting out complex neighborhood matters. However, blogs are going to be, nearly by definition, unreliable. In most cases bloggers generate little to no revenue for their writing, and it is not their full-time occupation. Since it is not a full-time gig, posting frequency and depth varies and is never guaranteed.

I've been writing about DC news and politics for a while now, both years ago when I was in college and now for various blogs. However, I have to balance the amount of time I spend writing and researching with a full-time job. I can't attend hearings, I can't generally go to DC Council meetings. I can't spend time tracking down sources and interviewing them. If I can't do it via email or a 5 minute phone call, it's going to be left undone. We have larger blogs, such as DCist, but even those can only manage to have, at best, one full-time employee.

Only one thing is certain, someone, or some group, will come up with a model for local news gathering that is successful. The demand is there. People want good writing and reporting. There's no question about that. The trick is figuring out how to make the whole thing sustainable. Will the future model revolve around tapping neighborhood bloggers to act as reporters, and packaging their information into quality, fact-checked pieces? Perhaps, but that would require an editorial staff, and financing.

Will the model revolve around newspapers retreating behind pay walls? This is a possibility. I would likely pay some amount of money to read the City Paper. I'd probably pay a subscription to read Loose Lips. How much? That's the question. What is it worth? Previous generations grew up buying the newspaper. Now, though, there's an expectation that news should be free. Any suggestion to the contrary is met with a "well, I'll just read the news somewhere else." I'd pay maybe $5 per month to read a web site. Where did I get that number? I just made it up.

What about tax deductible donations to create newsgathering non-profits? This seems to have some promise, perhaps. Create an organization that can obtain grants and receive donations, and still release content for free. No one would ever get rich creating an organization such as that, but perhaps they could provide a much needed service. To me, this seems to be an attractive idea. It would be a large undertaking, issues of liability would need to be worked out, and funding sources would need to be identified. But what-if? What if someone produced a non-profit organization that acted like an associated press of sorts for local news. By coordinating under one umbrella organization, it would be possible to develop the 'institutional clout' that provides a 'check' against opaque government activities. All content could be released free and open to be reused by anyone, bloggers, alternative weeklies, or even TV, radio and newspapers. As few strings attached as possible. What about that? Would you donate $50 or $100 a year to sponsor such an organization? Would you encourage foundations to offer grants for this sort of thing?

I've kicked this idea around a bit as a way to cover local stories that fall between the cracks. It hasn't been done before, at least here, because it's a lot of work. It would be a huge gamble to dedicate time and energy to create such an organization. However, it might just help shape the future of local news. Who knows. However, everyone, from Leonard Downie Jr. to Erik Wemple, and even part-time writers such as myself are grasping to make sense of the future. Instead of sitting around waiting for someone else to do it, it's about time we act.

by Dave Stroup, filed under Media at 7:00AM

---