ABOUT 130 JOURNALISTS, bloggers, politicians, and other
hangers-on gathered at the University of Oregon’s White Stag Building
on Saturday, November 21, for an all-day conference called “We Make the
Media,” organized by Willamette Week‘s original 1974 founder,
Ron Buel. The theme: establishing a non-profit journalism entity in
Portland.
But the conference, co-sponsored by OPB and the City Club of
Portland, got off to a rocky start when Steven A. Smith, former editor
of Spokane, Washington’s Spokesman-Review, delivered his opening
remarks. “Some of you here today may be interested in or already
committed to harnessing the new media to advocate for a cause, to opine
on issues of the day,” he said. “To empower and inform people with like
ideas and similar interests… to open the most intimate details of
your life through a blog or a Facebook page or a tweet.”
Yes! And….
“I wish you well,” said Smith, who is hotly rumored to be in
contention to replace Oregonian Editor Sandy Rowe in 2010. “But
I am here today to make the case for journalism.”
With that, Smith opened a divide between those in the room who
thought “journalism” was entirely distinct from an active engagement in
digital forums, and those “digital ranters” in his words, who seemed
ready to use Twitter to show Smith that he doesn’t get to control or
set the parameters of the discussion about journalism anymore.
“The attitude of some of the core organizers was that technology,
like the printing press, is simply a method to deliver the news,” wrote
one conference organizer, Abraham Hyatt, on his blog on Monday,
November 23. “Wrong. Technology is journalism… the cavernous gap
between those two mindsets created an us vs. them mentality that drove
some of the Twitter crowd into a frenzy.”
“It’s a pretty white room,” said former State Representative Jo Ann
Bowman, commenting on Smith’s remarks on Saturday. “And you notice how
lofty he paints journalism to be—standing up for the little guy,
when really, it has always been about standing up for their
advertisers.”
One idea proposed for the new model of journalism was to “raft
together” successful local blogs like Bikeportland.org and Portland Food and
Drink, and fund them with nonprofit money. But Bikeportland Editor and
Publisher Jonathan Maus, reached via Twitter during the conference for
his thoughts, quickly pooh-poohed it, saying he’s already making
money.
“Why would I conglomerate?” he tweeted. “1) We’re doing fine as is
and 2) it would dilute our product.”
“If it can’t sell itself in the market, we have to improve the
product,” he added, in a separate tweet. “If the future of journalism
has to rely on foundations and donations… it’s not sustainable.”
By the end of the day, the conference audience had dwindled to 60
frustrated participants. The remaining attendees voted to develop a
proposal for a nonprofit organization devoted to investigative
reporting; to promote a “news incubator”; to “create a new entity to
fill the vacuum for investigative, analytical community news in the
Portland metro area”; and to start a new “public records disseminator”
with a $300,000 budget.
By press time, there were still few ideas about where any of the
donations might come from, but the conference has started a series of
Google groups to further the discussion, and its Twitter hashtag,
“#wmtm” has generated over 1,500 tweets.
Smith, in the meantime, remains unemployed, having quit the
Spokesman-Review in 2008 after refusing to sign off on another
round of job cuts. He now rants, digitally, at his ironically titled
WordPress blog: stillanewspaperman.com.
“If it can’t sell itself in the market, we have to improve the product,” he added, in a separate tweet. “If the future of journalism has to rely on foundations and donations… it’s not sustainable.”
Maus hits nail on head. Anything else (non-profit) becomes an advocacy group and automatically loses credibility in the realm of objectivity. If the bottom line is the dollar, media has to take dollars from many sources instead of one or two.
I disagree with D. If they can find the funding, a nonprofit investigative journalism entity would be good for the city. At the same time, it doesn’t necessarily have to be nonprofit. Whether it’s a blog like Bike Portland or a so-called “real” journalistic outfit like The Oregonian, these entities simply need to live within their means. People still want professional news and journalism delivered, but the old model simply needs tweaking. I think a lot of newspapers have had a business model in the past that is not sustainable anymore. But that doesn’t mean a for-profit model can’t be successful.
As an experienced newspaper professional, the product, no matter what form it takes, is all about content. Content that is reliable, honest, fair, unbiased and not swayed by power, political influence or money. This may sound strange coming from someone who grew up on the business side, but content without integrity is a soapbox of poor opinion. The best job of journalism is when you equally piss off people on both sides of the issue at hand. THIS is what people want to know, what they want to read and what they may even pay for. It’s called an audience.
I recently came across your blog and have been reading along. I thought I would leave my first comment. I don’t know what to say except that I have enjoyed reading. Nice blog. I will keep visiting this blog very often.
Alena
http://grantfoundation.net