Journalist: Oh No! Student Journalists Will Destroy Journalism!

from the oh-please dept

Fri, Sep 25th 2009 6:38pm — Mike Masnick

So for the last few years, all we keep hearing about from professional journalists is how there is less and less reporting going on, and how we'll all miss "real" reporting once it's gone. They complain that without new business models journalism itself is doomed. Leave aside how ridiculous all of that is (and, yes, it's totally ridiculous), when a new project comes along that will enable more reporting in the San Francisco Bay Area, via a partnership between radio station KQED and journalism students at Berkeley, along come the professional reporters complaining about how this is the death of journalism and must be stopped. That's the view of the East Bay Express's Robert Gammon. Why? Well, because it involves students instead of pro journalists, and thus is unfair competition:

The venture also threatens traditional news media in the Bay Area, because it will rely on 120 journalism students at Cal who will work for free. The massive free-labor workforce will give the new venture a huge advantage over established Bay Area media organizations that depend on paid, veteran journalists to gather and put together news stories.

I read that and all I can think is, Mr. Gammon, did you really just mean to suggest that your years of experience and professional connections are so worthless that a group of students will automatically beat you in the marketplace? Because that's what he said. After we keep being told how pro journalists are so important, and all their experience, knowledge and reporting chops differentiates them from the unwashed masses, here is a guy who is flat-out admitting that he has no advantage over some pure amateurs.

Let's hope UC Berkeley and KQED seriously rethink this plan before it goes live early next year. The idea of a non-profit news organization has merit, but using what amounts to slave labor to make it happen is bad for journalism.

So, let me see if I get this straight. Things have been really bad because there were fewer reporters working on the news, and we'll all miss them when they're gone... but as soon as anyone new enters the market, it will be bad for journalism? And even if the journalism is done by students who have no experience, the amazing pros simply won't be able to compete? Yeah, that's believable.

Thank you for reading this Techdirt post. With so many things competing for everyone’s attention these days, we really appreciate you giving us your time. We work hard every day to put quality content out there for our community.

Techdirt is one of the few remaining truly independent media outlets. We do not have a giant corporation behind us, and we rely heavily on our community to support us, in an age when advertisers are increasingly uninterested in sponsoring small, independent sites — especially a site like ours that is unwilling to pull punches in its reporting and analysis.

While other websites have resorted to paywalls, registration requirements, and increasingly annoying/intrusive advertising, we have always kept Techdirt open and available to anyone. But in order to continue doing so, we need your support. We offer a variety of ways for our readers to support us, from direct donations to special subscriptions and cool merchandise — and every little bit helps. Thank you.

–The Techdirt Team

Filed Under: bay area, journalism, local news, san francisco, students

51 Comments

If you liked this post, you may also be interested in...

Reader Comments

Subscribe: RSS

View by: Time | Thread

Anonymous Coward, 25 Sep 2009 @ 6:50pm

If the people pay more attention to the "amateur" than the "pro" that's because the "pro" isn't doing his/her job. WE HAVE EVERY RIGHT to pay attention to WHO WE WANT TO and you have ZERO RIGHT to get government laws that interfere with that.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
- Michael Price (profile), 27 Sep 2009 @ 9:38am
  
  Re:
  So in other words it is entirely believable that the students would win and win easily. I've just read the sunday Sydney Morning Herald and it contained articles on how the poor cops were being maligned about the Haneef case (so they jailed an innocent man on no genuine evidence, it's hard to get it right), Iran's "secret" nuclear facility (the one they openly announced) and how video games rot your brain (studies say the opposite). This from a "quality" newspaper.
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
  - ..., 27 Sep 2009 @ 10:16am
    
    Re: Re:
    Yes, the majority of journalism is just propaganda in a pretty package.
    [ link to this | view in chronology ]
ChurchHatesTucker (profile), 25 Sep 2009 @ 6:53pm

The East Bay Express?
I'm on the wrong coast to judge, but isn't that one of those 'death of journalism' papers itself?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Anonymous Poster, 25 Sep 2009 @ 7:03pm

That is an epic paradox this guy's suggesting.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Anonymous Coward, 25 Sep 2009 @ 7:13pm

A segue:

The Volokh Conspiracy has an interesting article about online articles from major media websites. Eugene Volokh (UCLA Law School) has some timely observations you might want to peruse.

MLS
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
AnonJr, 25 Sep 2009 @ 7:50pm

Forgot their jobs...
Somehow I think the "death of journalism" is due more to the journalists spending all their time writing about the "death of journalism". If they were actually reporting, I don't think it would be as big an issue... but maybe that's just me.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Anonymous Coward, 25 Sep 2009 @ 7:56pm

His fears aren't entirely unfounded ...
... the same has been happening for years in fields like IT and engineering. Experience and skill doesn't win out in the marketplace if lesser skilled "good enough" labor is available. He may be wrong in the big picture sense, but his worries aren't entirely baseless.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
- Anonymous Coward, 25 Sep 2009 @ 9:18pm
  
  Re: His fears aren't entirely unfounded ...
  well, then those that are "good enough" can do the jobs they are "good enough at" and get BETTER at those jobs while those more experience people that are already "better" can do more sophisticated jobs that will advance technology and the industry further. Why should those that are better waste time doing the job that someone less experienced can easily do instead of using that time to do more sophisticated tasks.
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
  - Krevy, 25 Sep 2009 @ 11:15pm
    
    Re: Re: His fears aren't entirely unfounded ...
    To answer your question, it's quite simple. The person who is better doesn't want to waste his time with nonsense that is harder because it isn't harder in the sense that it involves a lot of braincells but because someone forgot what autmation is. Just do it good enough so you have a job and can collect your pay. You aren't being paid to save the world.
    [ link to this | view in chronology ]
    - Anonymous Coward, 26 Sep 2009 @ 12:28am
      
      Re: Re: Re: His fears aren't entirely unfounded ...
      I didn't ask a question and I can't really understand what you're trying to say.
      
      "because it isn't harder in the sense that it involves a lot of braincells"
      
      Notice I used the word "sophisticated" not necessarily "harder."
      
      "because it isn't harder in the sense that it involves a lot of braincells "
      
      Then the stuff that you want the more experienced person to do is stuff that entry level people can do perfectly well. As a result, the entry level people should be allowed to do it so
      
      A: They can gain experience too
      
      B: more experienced people can worry about more sophisticated tasks.
      
      If the more experienced people have nothing to offer that the less experienced people have then the job is basically a commodity job, like chopping down trees or picking oranges, and we should encourage more sophisticated jobs to become commodity jobs where less experienced people with less education can perform those jobs more effectively at a cheaper price so as to enable the free market to create more sophisticated jobs that more experienced people can occupy. Otherwise, why should an industry hire a more experienced orange picker than a less experienced if both do the same job perfectly well? The same exact thing applies here.
      
      But in the field of journalism more experienced people are likely to have a niche that less experienced people don't have. More experienced people, for instance, can learn specified topics; like biology, physics, law, etc... and start reporting/commenting on those topics with better detail and accuracy and clarity and insight. The fact is that there is SO MUCH information out there, so many fields you can learn and get a PH.D in that an experienced journalist can spend an entire lifetime studying these fields and barley scratch the surface but the fact that the more experienced journalists will have more experience reporting/commenting and being correcting and studying various topics will yield more value for the more experienced journalist to expand on these topics instead of just being a generalist. So yes, less experienced journalists should be allowed to take the place of more experienced journalists and more experienced journalists should be forced to compete with less experienced journalists to encourage the more experienced journalist to advance his/her understanding of various issues and continue to become a BETTER reporter/commenter than less experienced journalists so as to create a niche for himself/herself when it comes to commenting and reporting on various issues. If the more experienced journalist isn't going to advance his/her knowledge to offer something of value that the less experienced journalist can't offer as easily IN A FREE MARKET (ie: without crying to the government for help) then perhaps the more experienced journalist DESERVES to get paid as much as the less experienced journalist.
      [ link to this | view in chronology ]
      - Anonymous Coward, 26 Sep 2009 @ 12:42am
        
        Re: Re: Re: Re: His fears aren't entirely unfounded ...
        In other words if journalism really is a commodity job (and I don't believe that for MANY reasons) where entry level people can do as good a job as experienced people then LET IT BET. That way we can allocate simple jobs to less entry level people and as more sophisticated people who want more pay will fulfill a more relevant market need. As less experienced people advance and become more sophisticated they will eventually move on to other jobs that serve a more relevant market need while their job is replaced by less sophisticated people.
        
        But I find this hard to believe in journalism. Those who are entry level will become sophisticated within the field and will gain a good reputation (ie: like Mike on Techdirt has) with the people of being a reliable reporter and/or commentator and THAT will give that person a competitive advantage. Entry level people may take their old position but then that just means it's time for them to advance their position and to start reporting and reporting on a wider range of topics with a lot more specificity.
        
        I mean, look at techdirt, we go into FAR MORE details on issues than mainstream media and this is a pretty general blog even. They have specialized blogs that deal with patents far more specifically and even blogs that deal with patents involving pharmaceuticals. There are blogs that deal with medicine specifically and discuss patents (among other things) within medicine. Face it, mainstream media and all these "experienced" journalists have completely failed us, mainstream media is a joke and we should ABSOLUTELY allow anyone to speak their mind on radio and blogs and to report on various issues so as to cover issues that aren't normally covered in more specificity and to cover a wider range of views instead of just the view that big corporations want to broadcast because of their control over mainstream media.
        [ link to this | view in chronology ]
        
        Anonymous Coward, 26 Sep 2009 @ 12:49am
        
        Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: His fears aren't entirely unfounded ...
        There are blogs that deal with copyright specifically, there are blogs that deal with prior art specifically, there are blogs that deal with ALL SORTS of issues VERY specifically. Yes, everyone should absolutely have a right to blog about what they want and others who are interested in these topics should have a right to read and respond to these blogs. Mainstream media is VERY general and usually they only discuss certain sides of an issue while censoring other sides and stories that may upset very large corporations.
        [ link to this | view in chronology ]
        
        eurydice (profile), 26 Sep 2009 @ 9:53am
        
        Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: His fears aren't entirely unfounded ...
        AC said: "and we should ABSOLUTELY allow anyone to speak their mind on radio and blogs and to report on various issues..."
        
        ...With which I completely agree. But that is not the same as hiring people to work for free. It is not slave work either if the free workers do it voluntarily, but nonetheless it pressures down the price of that kind of job.
        [ link to this | view in chronology ]
        
        Anonymous Coward, 26 Sep 2009 @ 5:29pm
        
        Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: His fears aren't entirely unfounded ...
        "With which I completely agree."
        
        The government does not agree. If they agreed the airwaves, cablecos, and laws wouldn't be structured the way they are. They may tell me they agree but their actions tell me they don't agree and I have every reason not to trust them.
        [ link to this | view in chronology ]
      - Anonymous Coward, 26 Sep 2009 @ 8:24am
        
        Re: Re: Re: Re: His fears aren't entirely unfounded ...
        another thing you can do is start learning new languages so you can start reporting and commenting (and translating) on issues that involve other languages and/or other countries. People who speak multiple languages are VERY valuable. It's YOUR job to make yourself NATURALLY more valuable, it's not the governments job to make you artificially more valuable. If you're too lazy to do anything to make yourself naturally more valuable than an entry level journalist that's YOUR fault, it's YOUR failure, no one else is to blame.
        [ link to this | view in chronology ]
        
        Anonymous Coward, 26 Sep 2009 @ 8:32am
        
        Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: His fears aren't entirely unfounded ...
        and I'm sure ESPECIALLY in the field of journalism speaking multiple languages is very valuable. But if you fail to make yourself naturally more valuable because you're too lazy then that's your problem and not the governments.
        [ link to this | view in chronology ]
      - eurydice (profile), 26 Sep 2009 @ 9:46am
        
        Re: Re: Re: Re: His fears aren't entirely unfounded ...
        That it the point exactly, I think, that the worried journalist is trying to say. The market is biased if a bunch of people start working as journalists for FREE. I don't know what your job is, but how would you fell if a bunch of people started working your kind of job for free? Wouldn't you start worrying for your next yearly salary negotiation with your boss? I know I would.
        [ link to this | view in chronology ]
        
        Chronno S. Trigger (profile), 28 Sep 2009 @ 6:26am
        
        Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: His fears aren't entirely unfounded ...
        "Wouldn't you start worrying for your next yearly salary negotiation with your boss?"
        
        You damn right I would be, but I wouldn't be asking for government intervention or even asking to stop the people from doing it for free. If the job that I do can be done for free then I better damn well get more valuable skills.
        
        What's the difference between this and someone getting payed half or a quarter of what you do to do the same exact job? If you found out that the newcomers that do the same exact job that you do are getting payed 25% of what you are, won't you get worried as well?
        
        This is where experience and valuable skills come in. I don't have to worry about the people who do tech support for free or extremely low pay because I have the experience and skills to do it right. And if they also have the experience and still charge less or none, it's called competition and I need to adjust my value or price accordingly.
        [ link to this | view in chronology ]
      - Krevy, 27 Sep 2009 @ 1:15pm
        
        Re: Re: Re: Re: His fears aren't entirely unfounded ...
        We have the same end view but different view point attaining that end view.
        
        As far as I know people read the news only to socialize. They don't read about to get a "scoop". It's mostly related to the interaction between human being so you can say "Did you read that on the news? Can you believe it?!".
        
        A journalist who has a Phd. is a waste of money, personally. A journalist with a Phd. in Computer Engineering, or any other form of Egineering, is not a journalist because he wanted to be one but probably because he coudln't find a job in the Engineering field.
        
        Furthermore, people overhype the term "professional". As it stands, it means nothing other than being curteous, thus having curteous behaviour. Basically, professional means being respectful of others. It does not mean that you are well educated. Furthermore, have higher level degrees does not mean you are well educated.
        [ link to this | view in chronology ]
        
        nasch (profile), 28 Sep 2009 @ 12:08pm
        
        Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: His fears aren't entirely unfounded ...
        Furthermore, people overhype the term "professional". As it stands, it means nothing other than being curteous, thus having curteous behaviour.
        
        No, it means being paid for doing a job. Consider professional athletes. "Courteous" isn't the first word that comes to mind, is it? But they're professionals, because they have a paid career in whatever sport they play. Another definition is more akin to "white collar": professional careers such as law, accounting, etc. However, I've never heard it defined as "courteous".
        [ link to this | view in chronology ]
  - eurydice (profile), 26 Sep 2009 @ 9:40am
    
    Re: Re: His fears aren't entirely unfounded ...
    Because they might not find someone who will pay them what they are worth when there are a ton of cheap newbies out there pressing down the price of experience.
    [ link to this | view in chronology ]
- Anonymous Coward, 25 Sep 2009 @ 9:21pm
  
  Re: His fears aren't entirely unfounded ...
  What you are asking for us is to harm human advancement and society by giving jobs that less experienced people can do to more experienced people and hence the less experienced people get less experience in more relevant and sophisticated jobs while the more experienced people aren't getting experience in even more sophisticated jobs because they are doing the jobs that less experienced people can do. This is BAD for human advancement. As a society we need to advance human understanding not create artificial restrictions that hinder that advancement.
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
  - eurydice (profile), 26 Sep 2009 @ 10:00am
    
    Re: Re: His fears aren't entirely unfounded ...
    I completely agree. In a perfect world that's how it would and should be. But I doubt that that's how it is and will be in any near future with journalism. I know some investigative journalists myself, and they suffer to get their (expensive) stories sold or funded because more and more media are cutting their budgets for investigative journalism. I wish that the majority of journalists, also the students, would get a chance to excel in investigative journalism, and that someone would pay them to do it.
    [ link to this | view in chronology ]
- Anonymous Coward, 26 Sep 2009 @ 10:57am
  
  Re: His fears aren't entirely unfounded ...
  "the same has been happening for years in fields like IT and engineering. Experience and skill doesn't win out in the marketplace if lesser skilled "good enough" labor is available."
  
  If the new entrants really aren't able to provide better service than senior journalists then there is no reason to allow the price of the product to become cheaper. However, what you are suggesting is that people are incompetent and somehow unable to choose better quality products over lower quality products because they are too ignorant and stupid so wee need some condescending "professional" to dictate to us what constitutes higher quality news/journalism so that s/he can charge a higher price. We are as capable of deciphering a good journalist from a bad one just like the "professionals" and we don't need some condescending journalist to cry to congress that s/he can't provide a better service to us so congress has to start passing laws.
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
  - Anonymous Coward, 26 Sep 2009 @ 2:07pm
    
    Re: Re: His fears aren't entirely unfounded ...
    sp/If the new entrants really aren't able to provide better service than senior journalists then there is no reason to allow the price of the product to become cheaper./If senior journalists really aren't able to provide better service than new entrants then there is no reason not to allow the price of the product to become cheaper.
    [ link to this | view in chronology ]
- Anonymous Coward, 26 Sep 2009 @ 8:00pm
  
  Re: His fears aren't entirely unfounded ...
  No - it hasn't. Good engineers still have jobs here in the bay area. It's simplistic work that can be done by anyone mildly educated 10,000 miles away that gets shipped away. And the organizations that do a good job of doing that grow and are able to hire MORE good engineers here.
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
  - Anonymous Coward, 26 Sep 2009 @ 8:26pm
    
    Re: Re: His fears aren't entirely unfounded ...
    and I completely agree, those more experienced will naturally get better jobs than those less experienced without the need for government intervention. They will be managers and move up because they will make fewer novice mistakes and be able to manage a bunch of novices to ensure that they collectively don't make mistakes. Owners and those who own businesses would much rather trust someone experienced in a field to manage their business rather than someone inexperienced and would be more than willing to pay a premium.
    [ link to this | view in chronology ]
- Mechwarrior, 28 Sep 2009 @ 6:02am
  
  Re: His fears aren't entirely unfounded ...
  Actually, this is a misconception. Its not that "lesser skilled" labor is being used elsewhere, its that there is a dearth of skilled labor in the United States , and the only way to fill it is with similarly skilled labor from other locations. Have you ever seen the size of psychology or business classes at a university as compared to engineering and IT? Anecdotaly, it can be a difference of 4 to 5 fold.
  
  The situation you described is more a fault of the local population for looking for easy money...
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
Anonymous Coward, 25 Sep 2009 @ 8:11pm

Oh, please. Some of today's student journalists may be tomorrow's professionals. Is Gammon afraid of students doing what they need to build up a résumé?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Anonymous Coward, 25 Sep 2009 @ 8:15pm

Slave labor??? Give me a break. There's another word for it: internship. Interns are technically slave labor, but they are gaining experience in doing the job. He should be happy that students are willing to go into a field that gets a bad reputation from people just like him.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
- eurydice (profile), 26 Sep 2009 @ 9:38am
  
  Re: Student Journalists Will Destroy Journalism!
  In Denmark journalist students get PAID while they're on their internship!! I was one myself for 18 months, enjoying it so much more than the for the most part uninspiring teachers I was so unfortunate to have at the Danish School of Journalism. I'm aware, though, that more and more students from other disciplines in Denmark are so eager to get some journalism experience on their cv that they offer media companies to work for free! Which is really uncool for the journalist students because that will put their salary under pressure. Why pay for something (ok of a lesser quality, but will the masses notice?) if you can get it for free?
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
taoareyou (profile), 25 Sep 2009 @ 8:33pm

Slave?
I was always under the impression that "slave labor" was either forced, as in the workers have no choice. So is the volunteer fire department "slave labor" too?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Anonymous Coward, 26 Sep 2009 @ 12:45am

sp/That way we can allocate simple jobs to less entry level people/That way we can allocate simple jobs to entry level people

sp/and as more sophisticated people who want more pay will fulfill a more relevant market need/and as more sophisticated people who want more pay will fulfill a more relevant market needs
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
zaven (profile), 26 Sep 2009 @ 7:20am

flawed logic
"as soon as anyone new enters the market, it will be bad for journalism?"

So what they are saying is that they never want to see any new journalists enter the market? What happens when all the current ones retire? Guess that'll be the end of professional journalism.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
- eurydice (profile), 26 Sep 2009 @ 10:04am
  
  Re: flawed logic
  Of course we need a steady stream of newly educated people within all branches, not just journalism, but in some countries there are just way too many new journalists entering the market while the jobs are getting fewer. That, too, presse down the salaries of the people who happens to have a job. Supply & demand.
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
bugmenot (profile), 26 Sep 2009 @ 7:58am

Journalist have become truth terrorists
My kids were taught in grade school - 1990s - to never cite a news source to support a fact! The same lesson appeared in high school during report writing lessons. Needless to say they don't subscribe to a newspaper. And what did the latest studies show? About two-thirds of the population thought the news media was untrustworthy! And similar numbers declared the news media biased! Sure there are hard working honest journalists in the world. The problem is there is no way to tell anymore! Perception is reality. You can't believe a journalist! And that's the business case problem for news outlets. Few people with a brain will pay for untruths? And, for the intelligence challenged, they are being terrorized with untruths!
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
- eurydice (profile), 26 Sep 2009 @ 10:18am
  
  Re: Journalist have become truth terrorists
  I, too, learned not to cite a news paper article for facts in grade school, high school and so forth. And media and politicians are still the most untrusted people in Denmark (up there with used car sales people) Nonetheless, it's my impression that American media is much more biased than anything I've seen in Europe!!! Danish - and the European media I'm familiar with - still try to do unbiased and fair reporting. Only the editorials define the official political line of the paper/magazine. You can't tell while reading the articles if the journalists writing it are left- or right-leaning. If at all, you'll see some of both in both newspapers with left- and right-leaning editorials. PBC and NPR are close to reporting the European way, but they are so afraid, it seems, to sound biased that they seem afraid of asking critical questions. They leave it up to their sources to criticize each other. I prefer when the host of radio and tv programmes is not afraid to ask critical questions. Campbell Brown on CNN (formerly worked for the great Tim Russert) comes close.
  Another thing I hate about American tv news is that the hosts are told by their bosses to be funny and chit chat!?!? WTF!?!? Don't waste my time!!!
  It's bad enough with all the aggressive adds and deafening volume in the middle of news programs, that makes my heart rate and cholesterol numbers explode. MAN, I miss good, public European, add free media!!! Even if I had to pay a decent amount for it, it was very much worth it for me.
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
Anonymous Coward, 26 Sep 2009 @ 8:05am

Great idea! Tell all the student journalists that they will never have a job because you are retarded.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
eurydice (profile), 26 Sep 2009 @ 9:31am

Student Journalists Will Destroy Journalism!
I think you twist his point. His point is that if the radio station succeed in getting enough free content from students, who will pay for journalism in the future?
If the masses of radio listeners and other media users are fine with just music, adds and voluntary journalism, which I have a feeling they are, why should any media pay tons of money for expensive, time consuming investigative journalism, which is already under immense pressure as we speak?
I don't understand why journalists have a lesser right to be paid for their job that people in any other professions. Should we stop paying teachers, doctors, nurses, lawyers, handymen and engineers? I think that's the point the complaining journalist is trying to make.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
- nasch (profile), 28 Sep 2009 @ 12:25pm
  
  Re: Student Journalists Will Destroy Journalism!
  I don't understand why journalists have a lesser right to be paid for their job that people in any other professions.
  
  You're right, everyone has the same right to be paid: none.
  
  Should we stop paying teachers, doctors, nurses, lawyers, handymen and engineers?
  
  If someone is willing and able to do their jobs just as well for free, it would be pretty stupid to continue paying, no?
  
  I think that's the point the complaining journalist is trying to make.
  
  I think Mike got that point, he just disagrees with it.
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
NullOp, 26 Sep 2009 @ 9:50am

Well, duh....
Its because journalism has by-and-large already died that this guy thinks students can compete with him. Most news sources have turned themselves into tabloids, turning out on sensational piece after another. Gruesome pictures, descriptions and gross detail are all that's offered these days. Let the students report. They can't do any worse.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
- eurydice (profile), 26 Sep 2009 @ 10:30am
  
  Re: Well, duh....
  That seem to be true in the US, sadly. I'm amazed at how much time is wasted on tv news channels on these kind of stories instead of stories that are relevant to the citizens. It used to be the media's task to inform the citizens on what was happening in the society (and the world) so that they could perform their democratic duties (stay updated) so they can vote and make their voices heard based on an informed grounding. Why octo-moms and other scandals aren't left to gossip magazines, tabloids and "Believe it or not"-like magazines is a mystery to me. Instead, please give me insightful reporting on the world, science, business, environment & technology, politics/society and a bit of culture, please :-)
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
Hephaestus (profile), 26 Sep 2009 @ 7:32pm

Just a wish ....
"Asked if such efforts could accelerate the decline of troubled Bay Area papers like The San Francisco Chronicle and The San Jose Mercury News, as some experts have predicted, Mr. Hellman said: “I think that’s a reasonable question. I think that demise might be inevitable, anyway. This might put journalism, broadly defined, on a much more stable foundation.”"

Wish someone would help the recording industry in the same way .....
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Gene Cavanaugh, 26 Sep 2009 @ 10:32pm

Journalism
I believe people are missing the real point. When I was young (yes, I realize most of you had not been born then - in most cases, your PARENTS hadn't been born then), jounalists, such as Ernie Pyle (blessed be his name! - little Islamism there), Edward R. Murrow, etc., mostly reported the news, believing that, except in unusual cases, the NEWS was the thing (even then, Edward R. Murrow strayed only a little; to derail McCarthy, and things like that - important things.
Today, journalists are no longer journalists, they are JOURNALISTS - and seldom have much of anything to say that is worth listening to (now, blogs, on the other hand, such as Techdirt, tend to get too involved in trivia (artists, or is that artistes, whose biggest claim to fame is earning a lot of money without doing anything useful), but overall, actually report NEWS, and often with little or no comment.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Anonymous Coward, 27 Sep 2009 @ 10:46am

The only difference between ammeters and pros is that pros get paid.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Jerry in Detroit, 27 Sep 2009 @ 12:05pm

How dare they!
How dare these student journalists publish something when they are Nomenklatura!
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Anonymous Coward, 27 Sep 2009 @ 12:49pm

isn't this guy's experience being commoditized?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Anonymous Coward, 27 Sep 2009 @ 4:27pm

This is comedy at it's best! The leftists in the media complain about capitalism all the time, and cry when something threatens their income! Let the junior lefties take it for a while.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
- Anonymous Coward, 27 Sep 2009 @ 7:40pm
  
  Re:
  You believe everything you hear on Fox News ?
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
PT (profile), 27 Sep 2009 @ 4:45pm

It's all about control
It isn't just the threat to "journalism" that's driving this debate. The history of the 20th Century is the story of journalists and publishers being roped and tied to the service of governments, political parties, and other, less visible, interests. It's only the rise of "amateur" journalists and their freedom to publish on the internet that presents any obstacle to the complete control of everything we read or see by a small handful of puppet masters. So yes, Gammon is partly right - it is the death of journalism - but only propaganda journalism as we have come to know it. It's the renaissance of true journalism, the unfettered free press that special interests have put so much effort into suppressing for the past 100 years. And since the new press is not geographically constrained or shackled by expensive presses and distribution networks, it may be a little more difficult to put the lid on it this time. I can understand why the establishment is worried.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]