Jim Latham is secretary of the Broadcast Journalism Training Council. He’s also a collaborator on the Meld Pathfinder project. Just before the last event Jim sent the following piece – embargoed then as it was to appear in UK Press Gazette. Here’s the full unedited version of Jim’sthoughts on future journalism.
Seems like I’ve spent the last two years talking about nothing else but the impact of new technology on journalism training.
Grinding away at fixed views that there’s actually nothing new except the technology and that the old journalism skills will see you through.
Well, cards on the table, that’s rubbish.
Let’s start with basic newsgathering – recognising a story, checking it out, telling it well (and safely) are still core skills.
BUT…..if at the same time you’re not also aware of audio, video, stills, mobile phones and websites, as well as print, are skilled in the different technologies required to work in them, recording and editing, studio work, what story lines will suit each, how to write for each, how to pitch each to your editor, whether there are audio, video and stills available to illustrate each, whether interviewees are available in audio or video and when, what the deadlines are for each, how you manage your time to deliver each and still, in effect, tell six different stories well and safely, you’re not much use to the present–day employer.
Writing properly for each medium is critical – one major employer I spoke to recently despairs of finding anyone who can write a decent story for a webpage or mobile phone. Busking it on the “old” skills won’t do.
The extended knowledge of all-media law (not just print-based), ethics and (broadcasting industry) regulation should be built into that, in my view. Anyone want to argue?
I recently watched with horror a newspaper reporter shooting video on a protest march, unescorted, backing into moving traffic, so add risk assessment, health and safety and hazardous assignment training or someone’s going to die.
Then there’s voice development and presentation training so you don’t sound like an android – now you’re talking. Add a dash of that special something – the creativity you need to make those media work for you, to make your work stand out and we’re cooking.
Creating that training content is not a major problem – fitting it all (and shorthand??) into a coherent training programme is. But that’s my very rough vision of how to produce our future journalists.
The best arguments I’ve seen recently for accepting that this is a new genre of journalism and not just brightly repackaged traditional skills, come from American newspapers.
Two particular sites have been the centre of attention in the last few weeks – no question, they’re the two best news websites I’ve ever seen.
Take a look - p://www.startribune.com/local/12166286.html andhttp://www.concordmonitor.com/apps/pbcs.dll/section?category=photos
Fascinated by these two examples, I rang the papers to find out how they’d done it. The first is the Minneapolis Star Tribune, based in the city which suffered a catastrophic bridge collapse last year.
It opens with stunning stills and audio of the first incoherent emergency calls – but stick with it – the final shot is the killer. It’s an overhead, showing the remains of the bridge, still with dozens of cars marooned.
Each car is numbered – click on the number and you get the drop-down video story of what happened to the driver. Brilliant.
The Trib’s a big city paper, doesn’t recruit entry level journalists, naturally has highly developed print skills but the site impact could not have been achieved without an intensive in-house programme of retraining – staff have to meet stiff credit targets every month.
The Monitor’s small town, small team, great photographers, with someone who, by chance, knew audio. The story’s about a woman dying – up close and personal – parts of it very distressing. It takes a while to realize that what you thought was video is actually very cleverly edited stills and audio. What tells you everything you need to know though, is that the site was put together “by a kid in the office.”
Last month it won a Pulitzer.
I have no doubt in my mind that our target should be to provide trained entry level journalists, capable of producing work of that quality. The logical conclusion of what’s happening out there is that every training course, no matter how it’s presently badged, should have that aim.
Katie Allen’s piece in the Guardian on May 7 said that UK newspaper editors seemed to have got it – given any extra resources, a significant number would invest it in (re)training new media skills.
Another fascinating snippet of conversation to report from someone who should know (trust me). It’s broadcasting legend that Terry Wogan once said “The pictures are better on radio.” But one or two employers, with big investments in online journalism, seem to have identified those special skills – creating pictures in listeners’ minds with text and audio – as the key to that special something, that dash of creativity, “visualizing” the story to make it stand out and connect with an online audience.
99.9% of conversations I’ve had about the industry in the last two years have ended with the phrase – “interesting times.”
Interesting times.
Among the hot discussion topics at London Meld are those drawn from the Meld Pathfinder Google site. Themes include the need for journalists to produce stories offering a far greater level of interactivity. The need for journalists to be more deeply embedded in their communities where they can encourage greater user participation. The need to address the ‘file and forget’, ‘push’ mentality of traditional media. The need to understand and engage with social media. And the need for journalists to develop the appropriate entrepreneurial skills to survive in a new economic paradigm.
