The internet isn't killing newspapers. It's facilitating a transition.
Adapt or die.
The press dropped the ball with their coverage of the recent Fatima scandal. Salacious content aside, the incident presented opportunities for several interesting and relevant stories. Instead we got late, short stories that lacked much of the basic information behind the incident, and failed to explore the various angles.
- What exactly happened?
- What's the reaction from the staff, the PTA, students, the Ministry of Education, the Catholic School Board, and the currently beleaguered Catholic Church?
- What was the reaction online, where the video was first exposed and circulated?
- What of the fact that the video is essentially child pornography? What is the state of our legislation regarding the possession and circulation of child pornography? Do the Are people who have the video on their phones and in their e-mail inboxes aware of the gravity of what they're doing?
- How does this impact the Ministry's plans (or its PR) for its single-sex school pilot project?
- Weren't camera phones banned in schools about 18 months ago?
None of these questions were answered adequately (if at all), and the crux of that problem has to do with the failure to take advantage of the internet and social media as a source of news, information and feedback. We discussed this issue at length in class on Monday (thanks to Dwayne for bringing up the Minority Report example), and several commentators, including former journalist Danielle Jones, have weighed in on the issue.
A few months ago I argued on the No Behaviour Show that a reporter who doesn't have a blog or post their work online is not necessarily incompetent. I stand behind that, but I believe that all reporters should keep an eye on Facebook, Twitter, discussion forums and the commentary feeds beneath their own stories.
In fact, I'll take it one step further and suggest that each local newspaper should designate an internet savvy reporter to observe these avenues on a daily basis, quietly become a part of internet forums where possible, and produce stories (or story ideas) based on our active online communities. A reporter with that responsibility would have produced multiple stories on the day the Fatima scandal broke (no pun intended).
Similarly, if the Guardian kept a closer watch of the TTOnline forum linked off their own website, they'd be surprised at the number of interesting stories they'd have caught wind of over the last few years. Or the number of people they've reported on who regularly post quite revealing information right under their noses. And TTOnline pales in comparison to Trinituner.
As Mark Lyndersay noted a few weeks ago (and Jones pointed it out in her own blog), a social media desk is no longer innovative or novel...it's a necessity. And it has to be a specialized role. You can't simply take a reporter from another beat and expect them to get to the most out of stories like these...especially when you also probably expect that reporter to juggle two other totally unrelated stories that same day. It's unrealistic, unreasonable and unfair to the reporter.
Your online reporter has to be someone who knows their way around, and is part of, the online community. Someone who tweets, blogs, posts on Facebook, keeps up with their RSS feeds and podcasts, and quietly interacts with the unknowing public on forums.
The investment will pay off: You'll attract the attention of the sort of people who don't usually read newspapers, and encourage your mostly offline readers to explore the internet, hopefully using your own paper's site as a portal.
It's the perfect role for one of those cub reporters, fresh out of school, enthusiastic and energetic, but not too familiar with the outside world. Instead of burning them out on some uninspiring and frustrating beat, take advantage of their strengths and let them help you explore this increasingly vital frontier.
