Could Co-operatives Save Newspapers -- And Investigative Journalism?
from the how-about-it-Rupert? dept
A couple of weeks ago, we reported that Rupert Murdoch's paywall at the London Times isn't looking like a huge success. That won't come as a surprise to Techdirt readers, but does raise the question: if newspapers can't use paywalls alongside ads to fund journalists, what can they turn to? Here's a revolutionary idea: why not let the people who know and care most about the title -- the readers -- get more closely involved? That's precisely what the Berlin-based newspaper Die Tageszeitung, affectionately known as "Taz", has done. Here's the Guardian's description of how it came about:
For years, Taz -- circulation 60,000 -- was funded by state handouts. But with the fall of the [Berlin] Wall in 1989 came a drop in subsidy -- and by 1992, the paper faced bankruptcy. Enter the Genossenschaft, or co-operative: a group of concerned readers who valued the paper's independence, or its ability, as one has it, "to put its finger into the wounds of our economic system". The group invested its savings in the paper, and the paper was itself saved.
That bold move seems to have worked: today, the co-operative has a healthy 11 million euros (about $14 million) in the bank. It's owned by 12,000 readers, each of whom pays a minimum of 500 euros (about $650) to have an equal say in setting overall policy, discussed at the annual general meeting. Interestingly, that egalitarianism is also to be found in the newsroom:
"You're a very free journalist here," says deputy editor Reiner Metzger. Reporters are free to follow their own hobbyhorses, which he says makes life tough as an editor. "People argue very hard. We don't have a hierarchical structure where someone can say: shut up now." Salaries are pretty flat, too. Metzger is paid only [$650] more than the most junior reporter -- though he gets additional support for his children.
It's a fascinating approach, one that also seems to address the concern that in the age of the Internet, hard-hitting investigative journalism is a luxury that can no longer be afforded. Sadly, it seems unlikely that Rupert Murdoch would be willing to take a pay cut to around junior reporter levels to try it out for the Times.
Follow me @glynmoody on Twitter or identi.ca, and on Google+
![Hide This Hide this](https://ii.techdirt.com/s/t/i/topclose.png)
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: business models, cooperative, journalism
Companies: taz
Reader Comments
Subscribe: RSS
View by: Time | Thread
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
We're already ahead of the curve
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
1p2U
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: 1p2U
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: 1p2U
hee hee hee
art guerrilla
aka ann archy
eof
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
The best sources of news are independent websites and blogs so I hope the brightest investigative reporters will realise that and ply their trade that way. They will be respected so much more for it.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re:
If I was as obtuse as you, I could call that Socialism.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Sounds like an idea for the future.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Rather than try to shore up (with donations and co-ops) an institution that doesn't seem really focused on investigating things anymore, the logical solution is to direct cooperative cash to those who are actually *primarily* focused on investigation (as opposed to primarily focused on retyping press releases). And these days that tends to mean single-issue bloggers and disruptive website operators.
There will always be money to support newspapers because the people who write press releases need someone to distribute them. We don't need to pay for that: the establishment already has that covered, and if you think the elites are going to let newspapers (the voice of the establishment, after all) die, and let bloggers control the narrative, I've got a bridge to sell you. The elites will operate their newspapers at a loss before they'll let that happen.
Therefore, we simply don't need to worry about saving newspapers. It's a gigantic red herring dangled in front of the public by people like Rupert Murdoch to distract attention from their dying relevance.
What we need to do, is bring the training to where the genuine desire is. Bloggers are the ones who are truly motivated to get to the bottom of things -- so we should be pushing for them to trained in better journalistic techniques. Amateurs can learn -- but an establishment leopard cannot change its spots.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Co-op model in the U.S.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Good topic
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]