The Decline of Journalism

One of the big debates about citizen journalism is whether it undermindes the 'profession' of journalism, and critics of citizen journalism highlight the absence of editorial processes and quality guarantees in citizen journalism. But this argument presupposes that standard 'professional' journalism is of a high standard, that quality control is followed and that we can trust what we find in the mainstream media. At least one new book shows that this is highly questionable.

Flat Earth News by Nick Davies describes the results of an empirical survey, led by a former journalist, into the content of British newspapers.  This quote from a review of the book describes what the researchers found:

"They found that a massive 60 per cent of these quality-print stories consisted wholly or mainly of wire copy and/or PR material, and a further 20 per cent contained clear elements of wire copy and/or PR to which more or less other material had been added. With 8 per cent of the stories, they were unable to be sure about their source. That left only 12 per cent of stories where the researchers could say that all the material was generated by the reporters themselves. The highest quota proved to be in the Times, where 69 per cent of news stories were wholly or mainly wire copy and/or PR . . . The researchers went on to look at those stories which relied on a specific statement of fact and found that with a staggering 70 per cent of them, the claimed fact passed into print without any corroboration at all. Only 12 per cent of these stories showed evidence that the central statement had been thoroughly checked."

So it seems that fact-checking, ensuring that stories are based on more than 1 source, and many of the other sacred tenets of good journalism are falling by the wayside. In his review of the book, John Lanchester draws some conclusions about the implications of this:

"So we have arrived at a place where ‘the heart of modern journalism’ has become ‘the rapid repackaging of largely unchecked second-hand material, much of it designed to service the political or commercial interests of those who provide it’. In the old days, at this point in the story, it would be time to Name the Guilty Men. They would once have been the evil proprietors, top-hatted cigar-smoking manipulators of public opinion. I don’t agree with the conspiracy theory of the proprietor press, nor does Davies: he thinks that it’s sheer commercial pressure that is to blame. It’s the pressure on costs – to produce more, cheaper copy – that is the ultimate culprit for the state of the modern press."

You can read Lanchester's review here:

www.lrb.co.uk/v30/n05/lanc01_.html