It’s been a big week for the media in Australia. After the Government announced a media reform package on Tuesday, News Ltd. declared war. The Daily Telegraph ran a front page story on Wednesday comparing Communications Minister Stephen Conroy with the likes of Stalin, Kim Jong Il, and a number of other dictators. On the same day News Ltd. Chief Kim Williams has said that the Government was using ‘Soviet Style’ tactics.
This week is part of a long debate about the media in Australia, one that seems to have intensified significantly over the past couple of years. There are major issues that media agencies are facing in Australia, and around the world. Last year, both Fairfax and News Ltd. announced mass sackings of journalists as newspaper circulation continues to drop. Whilst many would have different experiences with the issue, there are also growing concerns about the quality of content now on offer in Australia’s major media outlets – a so called “crisis in journalism”.
This brings up some pretty important questions. What are the causes of these problems, and what solutions are available? How can we ensure a vibrant media in Australia? One of the latest pieces I read in the Occupy Handbook (if you click on The Occupy Handbook tag you will see other reviews on pieces from the book) provides an interesting perspective on the media in capitalism; one that is worth considering in the Australian context. The piece, Occupy the Media, was written by Democracy Now!’s Amy Goodman and Denis Moynihan. They outline the issues they have with the modern media system like this:
“We need a media that covers grassroots movements, that seeks to understand and explain the complex forces that shape our society, a media that provides information and empowers people to make sound decisions on the most vital issues of the day: war and peace, life and death. Instead, the media system in the United States, increasingly concentrated in the hands of fewer and fewer multinational corporations, spews a relentless stream of base “reality” shows (which depict anything but reality), hollow excuses for local news that are larded with ads and highlight car accidents and convenience store robberies, and an obsessive coverage of traffic, sports, and extreme weather (which is never linked to another two words: climate change). Perhaps most harmful of all, we get the same small circle of pundits, who know so little about so much, explaining the world to us and getting it so wrong.”
Goodman and Moynihan don’t however offer the standard sorts of arguments of what is wrong with the media; that ownership is concentrated in too few hands, that mainstream media is biased, or that journalists are too focused on the personal and not on policy (although I believe they see these as problems). Nor do they offer standard solutions; new regulations, a ‘fairness doctrine’ etc. Instead, through drawing the connection between the Occupy Movement and the mainstream media, Goodman and Moyniham aim to look at the root causes behind some of the issues the media faces:
“At the heart of the Occupy Wall Street movement is the critique that wealth and opportunity are not equitably distributed, and our media system, largely controlled by corporations, contributes to that status quo.”
This is the sort of critique that places media squarely within the operations of a capitalist system (it’s interesting, as unlike many other companies, media agencies often don’t get critiqued in this way. For some reason they are seen through a ‘greater good’ lense that forgets the profit motive).
So what does this critique offer us? It’s rather simple – for those who run media agencies, there is only every one real concern – how much money they can make. Media agencies are a profit-making business, and if there is a choice, making money will always come ahead of good journalism. Media owners will always be looking to streamline, to find ways to make new cash, to ‘monetise’ their product (and it’s important to note that often that can mean losing money on media if the agenda it can push can make money elsewhere).
And whilst one may think that is a good and efficient way to run other businesses – to produce the best quality product there is (although, as we should know, I don’t necessarily believe this to be the case), in the media in particular it can cause real problems. That’s because doing good journalism can’t be done ‘efficiently’ in the way capitalism sees it. Good journalism takes time, it takes resources, and it takes money. And the capitalist media system isn’t providing this.
So what is the solution? Goodman and Moynihan tend suggest that it is the corporate nature of media that is the problem, and therefore stripping this nature away is the real solution:
“The “crisis in journalism”, which has been blamed on the Internets disruptions of traditional advertising business models, is also traceable to the very corporate behaviour that many of the Occupiers are protesting. Leverage buyouts of media properties have left newspapers with massive debt, forcing layoffs of journalists and support staff. By stripping away the profit motive – by removing the Wall Street bankers from the picture – solid, disciplined nonprofit journalism is possible.”
And that’s the thing about journalism and the media. Whilst it is not the case for many other industries, journalism already has a vibrant, independent, non-for-profit sector. There is a model that can be used – one that puts journalism and the readers ahead profits. It seems to me that in the short term, this is part of the debate we really need to be engaging in.