Superman, Journalism, & Next Generation Media
Check out this panel from an old comic book. It’s a great reminder of the how society’s view of the media has changed over the years…and how that has helped fuel online news growth.
Superman debuted in 1938. The creators clearly wanted him to be a paragon of American virtue. He was, of course, the ultimate illegal alien. But like many foreigners of the time, Superman wrapped himself in the flag and declared himself a proud American.
Since they were creating an icon, the comic book creators made Superman’s alter ego a newspaper reporter. At the time it made sense, since newspapers were symbols of truth. Papers required balanced, honest reporting from ethical journalists.
There was a time in recent history when Walter Cronkite — the CBS News television anchor — was named “the most trusted figure” in the American public.
Flash forward to today, and Jon Stewart of the Daily Show was named the most trusted newsman. What does that say about the state of news in America?
If Joe Shuster and Jerry Siegal were creating Superman today, it’s unlikely that they’d make Clark Kent a reporter or any part of the mainstream media. The news has become so editorialized…and polarizing…it’s hard to imagine people looking at the profession as trustworthy or ethical. These days, journalists are considered among the least trustworthy of all professionals.
There are honest and trustworthy news professionals. Yet, it’s the public perception of the media that matters in this case. It’s perception and how customers interpret the product.
Let’s cut to the heart of the issue. Namely, journalists have an image problem. It’s a marketing and branding challenge. This is particularly ironic, since they (theoretically) control the media.
This poorly regarded public perception of the media may have even helped fuel the demise of print.
- Print folks were dreadfully late to the Internet. As the Web was developing, many news organizations tried to pretend it didn’t exist. Few created decent brand footprints online, which allowed upstarts like the Huffington Post to grab a foothold on news reporting.
- Traditional media failed to recognize the power of citizen journalism. Instant broadcast platforms made it possible for anyone with a keyboard, a digital camera, or a mini camcorder to play reporter. They failed to leverage the cheap, easy news right in their own backyards.
- Many stories are simply a headline and two paragraphs, which satisfies the basic need to know what’s happening. Depth and breadth of reporting comes later. Newspapers made a terrible mistake when they moved to bite-size news stories in print. Suddenly, the print newspaper was reporting the same stuff that was online the day before. For free. And that depth and breadth stuff? That was cut out of the paper.
- Newspapers drifted away from being impartial journals that worked to get both sides of the story, no matter how difficult. They replaced it with lazy advocacy journalism that was barely better than the basic blog.
People aren’t stupid. They know when something doesn’t smell right. If the paper was going to offer opinions and recycled stories, it was destined to lose value in the eyes of the community. Why pay for lazy reporting and opinions…when you can get it online for free?
In marketing terms, newspapers lost their unique selling proposition. They lost their mojo.
What was left was the tattered remains of the mainstream media. But don’t get me wrong, it has been a long, long time since journalists were considered trustworthy. This is not a recent problem.
Newspapers today are a mere shadow of their former glory. Many of them now just reprint news stories from the Associated Press or Reuters or some third-rate wire service. A few hang on, but it’s just a matter of time before they simply fizzle out.
That’s the bad news. There is, however, a glimmer of hope.
From the ashes of this pyre, it’s likely that some ember will spark a new journalistic flame. It’s possible that the old guard reporters will team with next generation journalists to build a new style of news reporting. Perhaps they will redefine what content, news, and balanced reporting is in today’s modern society.
It could be something that reports news of global significance, offering a view of the world beyond our neighborhood. At the same time, this new media can help us stay in touch with the local issues that affect us directly.
With newspapers dying, someone is going to have to pay for genuine news content. Perhaps one day, we’ll actually find a way to fund good journalism. You know, pay for stuff that has value. Remember when we used to do that?
And, if we’re all lucky, the next generation of inventive minds will create another archetype Superman character who represents rock-solid ethics and legendary strength.
If we give them the next generation of journalism, young idealists may again view journalists as a benefit to society. Guardians of truth who get both sides of the story, and allow us to formulate our own opinions. A friend to the community they serve.
And symbol of truth, justice, and the American way.
Newspapers: Throw a Lifeline to Your Newsroom
It’s not just the Internet that is killing newspapers. Newspapers are killing themselves. As the newspaper dies, it struggles to remain profitable…causing an inevitable death spiral.
Right now, newspapers could hold on longer if they could throw a lifeline to their local news reporters. Instead, to save money, newspapers are buying content from news wires. Unfortunately most people can get the same articles for free online. Making me pay for something that I can get for free isn’t really a sustainable business model.
Let me give you an example with my own daily newspaper The Record. The Record has always been part of my life, and I do not want to see it go out of business.
But here’s how the content from today’s (March 23. 2009) newspaper breaks down. I counted each homegrown article and each wire story article on every page. The newspaper was very thin today (46 pages), so it was pretty easy.
My apologies for the lame graphic. I input all the data into a Zoho.com spreadsheet. It may give advanced chart design features, but I just couldn’t figure it out. I felt it was more important to share the data, which is embedded in this graph. Feel free to utilize the info in the Zoho chart or spreadsheet.
This is a visual representation of how much homegrown content (56 articles) versus news-wire content (57 articles) is featured in today’s paper. That’s a 50-50 split of original content versus syndicated content.
It’s pretty obvious from the graph that the A section is mostly pulled from sources that I can get for free…and in real time. That’s just not a good way to keep readers. The A section is all available instantly on Google News.
Moving to the B section, things start to change. In the Local section, MOST of the news is relevant to me, based on region. The paper uses some syndicated sources to enhance the local news.
Over in section C, we see more wire content popping up. This is the Entertainment section, so we have a mix of regional stories and bunch of syndicated stuff that I can get just about anywhere.
Finally over in section D, we’re in Sports and Classifieds. All of the Classifieds are local, but none of it requires a reporter.
This isn’t exclusive to my local newspaper. As you read your daily newspaper, take notice of who is writing it. If it says “staff writer” it’s written in house. But if it says “Associated Press” then you can get that article (or one just like it) from Internet news sources.
Ironically, I was planning to write this post, and in today’s Record they printed a letter from a reader who wants more local news reporting.
Saving newspapers will require more than recycling wire stories. It’s about covering local events that matter to readers. And that means throwing a lifeline to the newsroom and paying reporters to create a product that people want to buy.
Flickr Feed
