Is it time give up on advertising as the funder for NZ news services?
Alastair Thompson
Public
Seen by 125
Taken from Five Starting Points For A Public Conversation On The Future of News In NZ
Is it time for us to should abandon the idea that in the long run marketers and advertisers -which historically has paid for the bulk of news production - will be able to continue to do the pay for it in the future - especially in a small market like New Zealand?
Commentary:
Advertisers and marketers have been the funders over the past 200 years. But the changes brought about by the internet arguably bring this period to an end.
In my experience advertisers do not really like being associated with news, at least not of the challenging journalistic kind. Most marketers trying to sell something then would much prefer to approach potential customers with an offer for a product when people are in a happy place - reading about a nice holiday, a sports hero or a theory about how to get thinner faster. In the past advertisers were attracted to the real news audiences because they tend to be rich and influential. But now that the internet has given marketers other means and places to reach these audiences more cost effectively - so much so that a commercial relationship with NZ news media is increasingly less important.
Marketers will tell you that contentious political discussions about welfare, investigations into business crime and accounts of the imminent destruction of the economy/environment/our freedoms are not a particularly conducive sales vector for say, home loans or women's fashion. Though they might be ok for Insurance. And in general, marketers are right about this, Bottom line they no longer need news to sell things and they do not believe they have any responsibility to pay for the news media.
- Alastair Thompson, Scoop Editor & Publisher
pilotfever Fri 6 Feb 2015 5:47AM
News is a conversation... like this... a oonversation I had with Managing Director of NEC that became one sided... after the founding of FOVE
https://twitter.com/AbbottMaverick/status/563564634712440834 ( https://twitter.com/AbbottMaverick/status/563564634712440834 )
Where is it all headed? Better ask me! @AbbottMaverick (also some screenshots dating back to SPTN pitch in 2007 on my Twitter)
Greg Brier Sun 8 Feb 2015 3:52PM
A quick look at the most effective news sources left would suggest that the state funded sources (in particular as opposed to corporate) are the more effective . We have other bodies (such as the judicial system) that state funded but independent. This model can surely be modified to use on a state funded media .
Democracy has unfortunately become corporatocracy, its not just the pursuit of profits , but the pursuit of power that drives the Murdocks of this world . Therein lies the danger . If the media wants to represent itself as the truth seeker , then how can it be in bed with such organisations.
pilotfever Sun 8 Feb 2015 4:14PM
Of course this is a no brainer. But public broadcasting has been robbed blind, probably lobbied out of existance by the Murdochs et al.
Greg Brier Sun 8 Feb 2015 4:40PM
Agree James...thus the need to thwart that power
pilotfever Sun 8 Feb 2015 5:50PM
Well a unconditional basic income would be a good start. State funding of bloggers and independent media can be indirect and solve other issues like the replacement of many jobs that is accelerating leaving many folks unemployed, and increased longevity pressuring our superannuation. It has worked well in trials elsewhere I don't see why we should tackle this issue at the same time.
Barriers to broadcasting with streaming services, go pros or even smartphones are low and getting lower. I'm not sure that direct funding of state broadcasting is even relevant except in the absence of impartial/independent alternatives. Independent views are legion anyway, that is why their should be many of them. Trending on Twitter one such example. I love Twitter
@AbbottMaverick #realworld #publishing
----- Reply message -----
Alastair Thompson Thu 12 Feb 2015 3:29AM
In terms of the power and independence of state media. When its not so independent - i.e. like Mike Hosking on Seven Sharp - it can be particularly dangerous and insidious as it gives the impression that the Government is both the actor and the critic. I.E. like Pravda or the Chinese Communist Party media.
Jason Brown · Thu 5 Feb 2015 11:38PM
thanks david - nice to be quoted!
"“Mythbusting” would be an important role here: all communities tell themselves stories about who they are, and often those stories aren’t accurate."
#suggestionbox - adding to concepts David outlines here, we could get readers to add to timelines, sources/links, q+a explainers, using hashtags or similar, as standard features for all stories, not just those journalists have time for. That is, such contributions would be highlighted in boxes, rather than buried in comments.
News media could also borrow and adapt the Buzzfeed reader review system but instead of "omg" "lol" and "fail" They could also review by voting on story importance and accuracy e.g. "useful" or "vital" or "urgent", and "one sided" or "incomplete" or "inaccurate" etc.
Date: Thu, 5 Feb 2015 21:39:19 +0000