Why quality journalism is good for society

by Alfred Hermida, on 1568 days ago , under Journalism, multimedia, New media, Newspapers

Mike Oreskes, executive editor of the International Herald Tribune, was the keynote speaker on day two of the Online News Association conference in Toronto.

The main thrust of his talk: quality journalism is good for society, it creates a democratic society and that builds wealth.

Some highlights:

• Journalists can help audiences deal with information overload. The proliferation of sources online is increasing the need for journalists, but these same forces are undercutting the business model for journalism.
• Journalists must not become conveyor belts of information. Journalists are independent observers of the world, they study and interpret what our audiences don’t have time to do.
• We need to reinvent journalism in a way that sustains traditional values of the profession but that can survive in a new media age.

This clip from the Q&A after his talk provides a flavour of the morning:

Print PDF

• Share this:
• Email
• Print
• Digg

No Responses to “Why quality journalism is good for society”

1. MTS » ONA NOTES says:

   October 20, 2007 at 5:04 am

   [...] Digital Edge Blog (Beth Lawton) – MyDigiMedia (Amy Webb) – PressThink (Jay Rosen) – Reportr.net (Alfred Hermida) – Lost Remote (Steve [...]
2. iamcontrarian says:

   November 15, 2008 at 4:54 pm

   The business model is not being undermined, it is being exposed and valued more directly.

   The classifieds was a business and the publishers used it to subsidise journalism.

   Now this is being valued appropriately.

   Journalism has many woes. Having just spent three years working at a major metro daily broadsheet, I am very comfortable asserting that editors ad journalists are guilty of two things which contributes to the lack of value given to journalists by consumers.

   1. The papers write what they find interesting. Australia had three pages of the US election each day for two months prior. Australians were not that interested but the journalists were.

   2. Bias. There is too much bias in stories. There aer opinion sections which is where bias is supposed to exist. However it permeates supposedly independent stories of fact.

   Journalists are no different to trade unions or executives. They get power and they abuse it.

   Being exposed to the market will take a lot of this power away and this will be a great thing. Maybe we will get some news.