Has there ever been a less profitable time to be a journalist?

Journalism is a most curious art. Its insistence on remaining above board, trustworthy and incorruptible has always formed a gaping hole in the budget sheet. And even the finest of exclusives only remain distinctive for the few minutes it takes to copy the facts and create enough caveats to make clear the story has been stolen.

So making money was never easy and is becoming all the harder as people stop buying papers, turn off their TVs and migrate to their mobiles. The weight of a story can now be measured by the number of different outlets who write it up and pump it out online. Often the stories are automatically copied and pasted from agency material; instantly sinking more crafted material into a sea of similar stories. It’s hard to be distinctive when hundreds of other organisations are vying for the same space and attention.

In my lifetime, one of journalism’s biggest friends has been its control of the news. Until recently, only the media had the ability and infrastructure to get the message out fast enough. We consumed it because we wanted to know what was going on and the main players took part because they wanted to give you their side of the story. But something big has changed. News no longer needs journalists. A single Tweet, for example, can change the entire agenda. And without control of the news, journalism’s biggest sales card is open to doubt.

Its impartiality is also being called into question. The term ‘Fake News’ has been overused to mean everything from made up stories to genuine revelations that the subject doesn’t like. Journalists are routinely accused of being part of a liberal elite who propagate their own agenda. As the tectonic plates of the political right and left have shifted apart, each side has become more aggressive in its dislike of what has cynically become known as MSM (the MainStream Media). It doesn’t help that journalistic balance has often been substituted for stories told so simplistically, only an argument ‘for’ and an opposing view ‘against’ are relayed. It calls the entire industry to account. If you don’t buy into journalism’s values, you won’t pay for its produce.

So what is the way forward for an industry seemingly suffering from a succession of significant defeats?

Before it looks for profit, journalism must once again define its principles. Schemes like the News Integrity Initiative beginning in New York are a start – but traditional media needs to play a part in redefining what it stands for too. Of course, starting from scratch isn’t an option. And some of the criticism currently levelled at the industry is undoubtedly cyclical. But some of journalism’s biggest brands are in need of repair.

Journalism must consider what it’s for and what is no longer required. Why pay vast sums employing people to provide rolling coverage when the job is done faster semi-automatically? Is it right that the same organisation that breaks the news also employs experts to analyse it? Does a broad collection of specialisms belong under a single roof? Each company will approach the answer in its own way. There is no such thing as a universal answer.

The biggest challenge remains monetising an industry that’s really good at giving its best work away for free. Paywalls, subscriptions and membership schemes offer some of the answer. The TV licence remains, for now, the BBCs alternative. A begging box at the bottom of articles is always an option, though it never took the beggar from the street. Online vloggers and bloggers have found solace in sharing revenues with their platforms, though there are signs that the likes of YouTube and Facebook are raising the bar over the freedoms that can be afforded to speech, in fear of advertisers taking flight. Of course, there’s always billionaire owners whose money may not be in doubt but whose motives are often called into question.

One of journalism’s strengths has always been to think creatively. Now more than ever, it needs to apply its mind to surviving alongside the technologies that have taken its old revenue streams. But it needs to act fast, take risks and accept that the days of controlling the news have come to an end. It must find ways to restore respect to an industry often accused of searching in the gutters. It must look beyond rivalries at shared beliefs.

I love journalism but I fear for its future. Companies that I have either worked for or alongside my entire career are downsizing their newsrooms and compromising their credibility. Career paths that used to start at the bottom and lead to the top are now being pointed in other directions.

One day, when she’s old enough, I want to tell my 3 year old daughter why following me into the business is a good idea. As it stands, I can’t say for certain that when the day comes either I nor any of the companies I’ve worked for will still be in the game.