Outside the Media Metropolitan and Beyond 2019
This series of articles was brought to you owing to and thanks to the efforts of what is at the core of the challenges the worldwide media industry is facing: the tech platform.
It is social media platforms such as Facebook, Twitter, and Snapchat that have taken over legacy media’s functions as a forum for discussion and a source of the day’s intelligence as the Hutchins Commission described them (Blanchard 1977).
As social media grew from communication channels to sources of news, they disrupted the journalism industry as we knew it. Pew research shows that the average age of newspaper readership is increasing largely owing to young people’s reliance on social media for news and intelligence (Shearer 2018). As a result, traditional media outlets are trying to make the ends meet while catering to the needs and rights of democratic societies.
The impact of social media’s outreach spared no media outlet, be it a small local newspaper or one with a history of more than a century. The Washington Post is among the latter. However, what makes its paywall more difficult to justify is its ownership. In 2013, e-commerce giant Amazon acquired the newspaper, promising stable revenues and growth in the web. Keeping into consideration the fact that media content such as news differs from other business products, the influence of the private sector can actually bear negative implications for legacy newspapers and their credibility before their readership. Thus a vicious cycle forms where the connection with businesses which can secure the financial stability of traditional media can also cause further damage which necessitates further aid.
That struggle between media economics and media responsibilities does not pertain to newspapers only. As news coverage on the AT&T-Time Warner merger points, the two giants, later followed by many other, felt pressured to take measures against the much smaller yet powerful competitor Netflix. In theory, the media consumer can expect innovative yet affordable content as a product of the fierce competition in the industry. In reality, media companies still leverage their power to control prices, distribution, and consumers’ choices.
That power could be subverted by law but the efforts to do so remain dependent on political factors such as partisan affiliation and pre-election campaigning as the developments on network neutrality from the past two years indicate. In the clash between governments and the corporate sector over who gets to control the Internet, it is consumers whom the Internet of Things promised to serve from its launch that end up paying the price for better and faster services.
What is more, existing laws are not sufficient to tackle challenging technologies such as deep fake videos which become increasingly common because of the interest of audiences but also pose a threat to national security and political figures.
Yet law cannot be pronounced powerless just yet. In favor of consumers’ rights to privacy jeopardized by those social media platforms, the EU introduced the GDPR which aims to replace dated laws unsuited for the contemporary industry landscape.
The silver lining amid the financial stagnation and the stark competition that the media industry is facing might be lying in the universal values such as media’s social responsibility to citizens that all media professionals share. In the lawsuit filed by CNN against the Trump administration, the law sided with the journalist who did not breach any law, but, in fact, was deprived of his right to due process and was subject to institutional pressure. In spite of their political leanings, polarized media united in the name of their rights and duties.
A contemporary media professional can thus learn a few lessons from the tumultuous the Western media industry just put behind its back.
Firstly, location does not matter in an era of cross-border digital communications. For that reason, anybody in the industry needs to keep in track with the latest trends and developments happening worldwide. Otherwise, an individual media professional can risk the reputation of the whole organization they work for.
Secondly, changes at the corporate level should take into consideration the existing research of similar actions undertaken in the past. Analyses suggest that old-fashioned transactions might not necessarily be the right means of tackling innovative technology and services. Until that right means is found, media executives should learn from the recent experience of other companies rather than dive into risky moves that can cost more than what
Thirdly, contemporary media professionals need to be even more critical, including toward the work of fellow professionals, what with the emergence of new technology that no law can yet describe within the existing legal frameworks. Rather than publishing without fact-checking in an effort to be the first one or to create sensation, now more than ever the media professional should be wary of the potential legal and ethical consequences that such publishing can bring to the individual professional as well as the institution they work for.
Finally, at this point in the tug-of-war between the market and the state, as both academic research and news coverage indicate, one thing is evident: changes might be driven by the market but it is up to the law to approve or defy such changes especially when they harm consumers or those who aim to preserve their values, journalists.
References
Blanchard, M. A. (1977). The Hutchins Commission, the Press, and the Responsibility Concept. Journalism Monographs. Retrieved from http://www.aejmc.org/home/wp-content/uploads/2012/09/Margaret-A.-Blanchard.The-Hutchins-Commission.May-1977.pdf
Shearer, E. (2018, Dec. 10). Social media outpaces print newspapers in the U.S. as a news source. Pew Research Center. Retrieved from https://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2018/12/10/social-media-outpaces-print-newspapers-in-the-u-s-as-a-news-source/
