Category Archives: Events

Paul Foot’s stories were not tomorrow’s fish and chip paper

Yesterday saw journalists rewarded in memory of the campaigning journalist Paul Foot, with the Guardian’s Ian Cobain taking the first prize for his investigation into Britain’s involvement in the torture of terror suspects detained overseas.

But as Private Eye editor Ian Hislop reminded the audience, it was a night to remember Private Eye journalist Paul Foot, who died in 2004.  Foot’s stories live on and influence today’s news, Hislop said: “There is a sense in which five years on, we’re still doing this award and Paul remains extraordinarily alive. People say journalism is fish and chip paper the next day. Well, that isn’t always true.

The Lockerbie story is a prime example, said Hislop. Foot provided the foundations for the ongoing journalistic investigation into the 1988 bombing of Pan-Am 103, uncovering evidence which throws uncertainty over the Scottish judges’ sentencing of Libyan Abdelbaset Al Megrahi to life imprisonment in 2001.

“Paul’s investigation from five, six years ago is the starting point for a story that’s still going on,” said Hislop.

“The ludicrous detail. I love the idea of Paul’s reaction [that] the man [Al Megrahi] was freed for compassionate reason; that would have amused him.”

Foot’s story on the solicitor Michael Napier, was another of his investigations that resurfaced this year, when Private Eye was threatened with an injunction courtesy of lawyers Carter-Ruck.

“In came the injunction, we weren’t allowed to say who it was (…) We won a case in front of Justice Eady – now you can imagine how crap their [the claimant’s] case must have been. That we won in front of Eady, unbelievable,” joked Hislop.

Once past Eady, the Eye finally won in the Court of Appeal, but he wasn’t just crowing over his Carter-Ruck victory, Hislop said, rather emphasising  ‘that even a story Paul wrote 10 years ago (…) never quite finishes and he’s still there’.

And now, investigative journalism needs more help than ever, he added: “[Investigative reporting] needs encouraging for obvious reasons, particularly in a recession: it’s difficult; it’s slow; it’s expensive; it’s risky. There’s no advertising. There are very few local newspapers. People are more interested in the death of the dinner party as a subject to fill a paper.

“This year has seen quite a lot of threats to investigative journalism.

“This year the editor of the Guardian and I were called to talk to the parliamentary select committee about the problems of libel and injunctions. I said there was a chill wind of libel blowing, particularly for these secret injunctions. And Alan [Rusbridger] said it wasn’t a big problem for the Guardian. That was pre-Trafigura so we had a good laugh later, when the Guardian was hit by it.

“These are the injunctions that are served on you and you’re not allowed to say what was in the injunction and you’re not allowed to say there was an injunction.”

Hislop, at this point, directed the audience’s eyes to the wall: “A charming portrait of Mr Marr – and we take that thought home…” [last year the BBC political correspondent won an injunction to stop the media revealing ‘private information’ about him, only recently reported; details remain undisclosed].

Foot would have loved this year’s short and long-list, continued Hislop. Stories about MPs’ expenses, for example, he said. “Again Carter-Ruck involved trying to stop that! Not that they’re in all the stories, but they are…” he added, as his last jibe to the firm for which the Eye has such a fond nickname.

But not the last time he stuck his tongue out at the legal profession. As he reached the nomination for Mail reporters, Stephen Wright and Richard Pendlebury, he waved two letters in the air; attempts sent today, Hislop claimed, to try and prevent him reading out the prize citation  – a copy of which is available on the Private Eye website of course.

Media for All: Solving convergence and ownership consolidation problems

As the traditional media continue their seemingly inexorable decline, how can journalists use new media to fulfil their remit to provide information and hold to power to account?  Journalists, academics and activists gathered in Bloomsbury, London last Saturday (October 31) to try to find an answer.

The Campaign for Press and Broadcasting Freedom’s (CPBF) Media for All conference aimed to tackle problems posed by technological convergence and ownership consolidation in the media industry.

Topics covered included the friction between increasingly consolidated media ownership and democracy, gaps and biases in news reporting, threats to local and regional news, and protecting and campaigning for diverse and high quality media.

“The collapse of people who are actually communicating is radical, it’s ongoing and it’s extreme,” said John Nichols, correspondent on American news magazine The Nation.

“In the USA today there are roughly 3,000 people working on the internet making news. Last year alone 16,000 newspaper employees lost their jobs.

“The internet is not replacing old media.  At best it is aggregating old media.”

Graham Murdock, author of Media in the Age of Marketization, spoke of the danger of powerful commercial interests closing off the creative commons offered by the internet.

Net neutrality was an issue, he said, citing how private media companies lobby for priority of access to the internet.

This must be countered by an online ‘revivification of public cultural institutions’, and the creation of alternative information networks to counter those being created by private companies, he added.

NUJ president Jeremy Dear looked how the crisis was affecting local news, taking as an example the closure of the Long Eaton advertiser last year, leaving the town with no local news outlet.  “The Long Eaton Advertiser was not a victim of the recession, it was a victim of a failed corporate culture,” said Dear.

Dear continued: “At the heart of our campaign must be the total rejection that profit must be the determinant of the success of local news.

“It’s that threat that led our union to launch the ‘Journalism Matters’ campaign, based on the premise that the supply of information is too important to be left to private companies.”

Dear called for a campaign to exert political pressure in the run up to the next general election: “Be assured that editors and owners are out there wining and dining the politicians,” he said.

“In the run-up to any vote we will be mobilising days of action.  These are battles for jobs, but they are also all about people standing up for local news.  We need to make the media an election issue.”

Damien Gayle is a postgraduate journalism student at City University, London.

Personality-led ‘sorry’ stories are often the easiest to write, says former BBC political correspondent

“We have to recognise that the blame game is something that is damaging journalism,” said the former BBC political correspondent Nicholas Jones, at the Institute of Communication Ethics (ICE) annual conference last week.

The demand for public apologies and the blame game is leading to a rise in the ‘cosmetic’ sorry and other empty rhetoric, Jones, who sits on the national council of the Campaign for Press and Broadcasting Freedom and writes on media affairs for the Free Press and the website Spinwatch.

“The herd mentality of journalists, and the ease with which the news media can be diverted by the quick fix of trying to find a scapegoat, are largely to blame for fuelling the ‘sorry’ phenomenon.”

Citing Sir Fred Goodwin’s public ‘apology’ over the Royal Bank of Scotland catastrophe, and Blair’s apology over the ‘presentation’ of the Bernie Ecclestone affair, Nicholas Jones demonstrated how the media’s demand for reparations has made them susceptible to spin.

“Sir Fred did not say ‘sorry’ for getting it wrong, far from it. He wasn’t going to take the blame. At no time, he said, did anyone anticipate the “scale or speed” of the slow down, so ‘globally it has caught everyone out’.”

Using the Bernie Ecclestone affair as an example, Jones suggested New Labour tactics were designed to manage the media’s lust for ‘sorry,’ despite the sentiment being negated by the context in which it is used.

“What Blair actually apologised for with regard to Bernie Ecclestone was that he wanted to say ‘sorry’ for the way the whole affair had been managed; he was apologising for the way it had been presented to party members. “It should not have come out in dribs and drabs … I apologise for the way this was handled … I am sorry about this issue … I think most people who have dealt with me think I am a pretty straight sort of guy.””

Media frenzy which is often sparked by controversy and an apology regardless of what it refers to, is part of the control mechanism:

“The first step is to excite the pack and then to massage the ego of the journalists by encouraging them to believe that it is their efforts which have helped secure an apology for the public.”

According to Jones, political spin deters good journalism: ‘Given good presentation the media could be stopped from digging further’.

In his paper – available in full on his website – Jones suggested that personality-led stories attempting to hold public figures to account are often the easiest to write:

“The hue and cry to get an apology can be entertaining, it can last for days, but all too often the net result is that journalists are at even greater risk of being manipulated. Sadly we have become addicted to the idea that obtaining an apology from shamed politicians or public figures represents a victory for the public, some sort of justification for journalistic effort.”

And it’s here to stay, Jones concluded:

“I don’t think we can turn the clock back: the hyper-personalisation of news is here to stay.  But what I think we will see is even greater sophistication on the part of political spin doctors and public relations industry to try to manage the personalisation of news and turn it to their clients’ advantage.  The insincerity of saying sorry is just the start of it.”

Additional reporting: Judith Townend

John Stonborough: From investigative journalism to PR

Media relations giant John Stonborough, managing director of Stonborough Media Group, spoke about how the skills he  gained as an investigative journalist have made him one of the most notorious names in PR at an industry event last Thursday.

Stonborough spoke about his transition to PR from journalism, explaining that his final film about Shell as an investigative reporter was ‘a little bit like shooting fish in a barrel’, as at the time the corporation fell into every trap he set and made it easy for him to ‘shaft’ them, he said.

He went on to set up a consultancy to offer PR advice to big brands (including Shell, his first client), to ensure they work ‘within the rules’ and customers are fairly treated, he said.

His talk, entitled ‘Blocking investigation or ensuring truth for clients?’, addressed the unpopularity of PRs with journalists and the impact of current regulatory structures on investigative journalism: “There is a presumption that you guys [journalists] are right and obviously the sorts of people I represent are wrong and that isn’t always the case; sometimes, and I hate to say this, but sometimes your wrong and you do not act ethically.”

Stonborough was the media adviser to former House of Commons speaker Michael Martin and spoke about how early assertions over MPs’ expenses turned into one of the biggest political scandals of the decade: “We all knew it was going to be a nightmare, but no one ever realised quite the degree to which it would explode.

“I certainly didn’t gain any great pleasure out of being able to say I told you so afterwards (…) the truth of it, he just wasn’t up to the job.”

Originally a policeman turned investigative journalist, Stonborough worked for the Daily Mail, BBC Radio 4, Thames Television and Channel 4. He also spent three years as a researcher for Roger Cook, and lamented what he saw as a lack of programming such as Panorama and World in Action: “There isn’t any hostile media; one of the big issues in this country is where the investigators are now.”

“All I’m doing is fishing on the other side of the same pond,” explained Stonborough, referring to his move from journalism to PR and expressing his fondness for the other side of the press fence:

“I’m still dealing with the same people, I’m still dealing with the same issues, I understand the problems of programme makers,” he said.

For the students in the audience Stonborough stressed persistence and hard work as necessary skills: “Be a complete pain in the arse and the first person to be a pain in the arse to is your prospective editor.”

Jeff Jarvis: ‘The fate of journalism is not in the hands of institutions’

Remember how, in true ‘beta-journalism’ spirit, Jeff Jarvis tested the idea for his forthcoming Guardian column at last week’s ‘Crisis’ conference in Coventry?

Well, here’s the final result, in today’s MediaGuardian, at this link. An extract:

“I am less protective of legacy news organisations because they have had a chance to remake themselves as smaller, nimbler, collaborative enterprises for the internet and have largely failed. The future of news – and there is a future – is being built by entrepreneurs who in change see opportunity, not crisis.

“In short: I say the fate of journalism is not in the hands of institutions. The fate of journalism is in the hands of entrepreneurs.”

#Outlook2010: Lauren Rich Fine on media’s future – ‘Is there too much news?’

Last week Journalism.co.uk attended the INMA and Online Publishers Association (OPA) Europe’s annual conference Outlook 2010 – the event focused on innovation, transformation and making money for media businesses. Follow our coverage at this link.

Former ContentNext research director and media analyst Lauren Rich Fine opened her conference presentation with a potentially ‘heretical’ question: “Is it possible that there’s too much news?”

Fine’s overview of the state of the media industry (focusing on the US market) and her ideas for a more collaborative, cooperative future can be listened to in full below:

Here are some key quotes:

On content:

  • “I would suggest to you that there might be too much content, that we need to see rampant consolidation, that it’s not just going to be in the newspaper industry (…) it has to be everywhere.”

On the newspaper industry:

  • “The newspaper industry has been very bad at being optimistic about its future, the newspaper industry has been really bad at marketing itself (and TV and radio are even more off-base).”

On advertising:

  • “Classified advertising is permanently exiting newspapers – and it should, it works better online.”
  • “If classified advertising continues to fall by the wayside this could be an industry operating with no margin.”

#Outlook2010: Germany’s WAZ media – learning from bigger players and going open source

Last week Journalism.co.uk attended the INMA and Online Publishers Association (OPA) Europe’s annual conference Outlook 2010 – the event focused on innovation, transformation and making money for media businesses. Follow our coverage at this link.

Regional newspaper WAZ Media has learned to punch above its weight online by looking at what bigger publishers are doing digitally and seeking out free and open source software and platforms to use, explains the outgoing CEO of its new media Katharina Borchert.

Starting with video the group supplied reporters with Flip cameras to capture original video news and began using a bank of freelancers to edit the footage.

The group has also joined forces with another regional publisher to create The Media Lab – a small company that invests at a really early stage in local online start-ups that add something interesting to the market, explains Borchert.

This has already spawned an online-to-print publishing solution for printed user-generated papers in areas not covered by WAZ’s titles – after a year-and-a-half the group expects this project to be in profit by next year.

Listen to Borchert’s talk on video, Twitter and regional media innovation online below:

#Outlook2010: LePost.fr – horizontal, not vertical, news

Last week Journalism.co.uk attended the INMA and Online Publishers Association (OPA) Europe’s annual conference Outlook 2010 – the event focused on innovation, transformation and making money for media businesses. Follow our coverage at this link.

Two years since its launch user-generated site LePost.fr – launched by Le Monde – attracts 2.5 million unique users a month (not a lot less than Le Monde’s online efforts at 3.5 million).

A team of six specialised journalists, two editors, one videojournalist and one investigative journalist are responsible for producing around 10 per cent of the site’s content – the rest is down to the users, who produce around 500 posts a day. It’s an integration of professional and amateur news – with teams of amateurs ‘coached’ by professionals, says the team.

More from LePost on how the site operates in the audio below:

“Our idea was to put a newsroom at the most dynamic part of the web (…) social media,” the site’s editor-in-chief, Benoit Raphael, says.

“We believe that people are no longer satisfied with vertical news. Traditional journalists choose and produce stories and deliver them to readers. In a networked media like LePost we let people co-choose and co-produce stories.”

Raphael says LePost produces ‘horizontal news’ – news to be shared, commented upon and added to.

Related reading: LePost.fr: How amateurs produce valuable journalism

Is World Journalism in Crisis? The podcasts

Missed this week’s video conference from Coventry University featuring journalism speakers from the world? No fear: it’s all available for your leisurely enjoyment:

http://coventryuniversity.podbean.com/category/art-design-media/coventry-conversations/

  • Professor Adrian Monck, World Economic Forum, former head of journalism, City University
  • Dr George Nyabuga, managing editor of media convergence, Standard Media Group
  • Jeremy Paxman, BBC Newsnight
  • Nick Davies, author of ‘Flat Earth News’
  • Jeff Jarvis, professor of journalism, City University New York
  • Professor Tim Luckhurst, University of Kent
  • Professor Richard Keeble, Lincoln University
  • Dr Fred Mudhai, Coventry University
  • Judith Townend, Journalism.co.uk
  • Dr Suzanne Franks, University of Kent

More coverage from Journalism.co.uk at this link

#Outlook2010: Don’t forget your print subscribers, says Associated Newspapers

Last week Journalism.co.uk attended the INMA and Online Publishers Association (OPA) Europe’s annual conference Outlook 2010 – the event focused on innovation, transformation and making money for media businesses. Follow our coverage at this link.

As the news media searches for viable business models for online and new revenue streams in the form of pay walls, members clubs and micropayments, the humble print newspaper subscriber may have been overlooked.

Such was the argument of Associated Newspapers’ circulation director Neil Jagger who explained to delegates how his group targeted home delivery (‘not the sexiest beast in the world’) as a revenue source.

At the start of this drive, there were around 2 million home delivery customers for UK newspapers – with the Daily Mail accounting for around 500,000 of those, explained Jagger.

Using a retail sales force of 30, Associated built up a 1.3 million-strong database of addresses  of newspaper subscribers not signed up with the Daily Mail by approaching retailers directly for the information.

These 1.3 million were sent a direct mail offering a range of subscription packages and vouchers if they signed up. The result was a 2 per cent take up (27,000 agreed to have the paper home delivered).

Not satisfied with this the team moved onto telesales offering the same package as the direct mail, which had a 7 per cent conversion rate (59,000 signed up).

Finally, Associated is using 200 canvassers selling home delivery subscriptions door-to-door and has so far generated 70,000 sign for an initial three-month period.

Following this push the Daily Mail has gained 156,000 new customers, says Jagger – an opportunity created by building this database of non-subscribers, using available information in a way that other publishers had not done previously.

Not all of the new recipients have stayed with the paper, admits Jagger, but, from the 156,000, 81 per cent are staying for 6 months after initially agreeing; while 64 per cent are staying 18 months or more.

“Once we’ve got these customers we’ve got to keep them,” explains Jagger and customers are sent loyalty packs, alternative subscription offers or money-off vouchers.

“We just don’t want to lose those customers.”