I read the article in today’s (October 6) Independent celebrating the paper’s 20th anniversary. Stephen Glover, one of the paper’s founders, recounted how journalists, mostly from The Daily Telegraph and The Times, became so fed up with what they saw as the declining quality of journalism, that they upped stakes and started their own newspaper. The article was a very good account of what must have been an exciting time.
This is thoroughly embarrassing, but I have to admit, the story made my eyes water. Glover writes: The Independent, beyond our wildest hopes, became the newspaper of the liberal establishment. It starts to appear (unpaid for by us) in television advertisements and posters because retailers and businessmen want to be associated with it. Young people carry the paper as a kind of badge, the beautiful chiselled masthead with its eagle angled outwards so that everyone can see they are Independent readers, that they too have rallied to the cause.
It is sickeningly sentimental, but, because I’ve been engrossed in journalism all my adult life, I found it touching.
But the tears welling up in the corners of my eyes were, I think at least in part, tears of disappointment. Because I read the story with the sinking feeling that I will probably never have the opportunity to be a part of something like what Stephen Glover, Andreas Whittam Smith, Simon Kelner et al were part of.
I live in the UK where, on one hand, the media are thriving. You can’t go anywhere without seeing people reading, listening to or watching the news. It is great to see such widespread enthusiasm for current affairs.
On the other hand, journalistic standards are hugely varied. “Red top” papers seem to invent stories. If the stories themselves aren’t invented, then certainly the quotes within the stories are. (The Quick Quotes Quill in Harry Potter is a brilliant take on this). The UK press also has a tendency to build people up for a number of months, and then, for no apparent reason, rip them apart with a ferocity that always surprises me. As a result, people don’t hold journalists in high regard.
What’s more, many young people don’t read the quality newspapers because they can get free alternatives -- alternatives which are under-funded and which do not do add anything to the national debate.
Still, at least people care about the quality of journalism here. If it's poor, people talk about it -- instead of just accepting it, they work to change it. It's pretty safe to say that journalism in Britain will always be important, whether it’s on TV, on the radio, in newspapers or online.
But my mind turns to Canada, where I’d like to one day return.
I was on Vancouver Island for three weeks this summer, and I was thoroughly disappointed with the quality of journalism. To be fair, I visited in August, which is the so-called silly season, so I was perhaps seeing a stripped down version of the newspapers, but I was still distraught over what I saw.
In a prominent paper, I saw what appeared to be a re-hashed press release about a Jamaican rum company. It wasn’t marked as an advertisement, but I couldn’t see that it was anything but. Have newspapers in Canada always been this bad and I’ve simply forgotten because I’ve lived in the UK, where there’s more editorial diversity?
The thing that worried me most was that it wasn’t just print journalism. My first afternoon there, I flipped on the CBC, hoping to see Canada Now or The National and ended up watching newsreaders waffle on about the PNE for half-an-hour before we got to any news. I think my British in-laws were appalled.
Yet, I don’t think there would be enough interest, advertising dollars, or journalists willing to risk their jobs to launch something like The Independent in Canada. Even though something like the Indy would be a great addition to the Canadian cultural landscape.
Perhaps I’m being far too pessimistic. Perhaps Canadians will get fed up with stripped down versions of what newspapers should be. Perhaps the demand for good journalism will increase. I do hope so -- but I’m not holding my breath.
Friday, October 06, 2006
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
3 comments:
I read in the Guardian today that the Indy "made" a £10m loss last year. Sort of puts things in perspective. *sigh*
Hi,
Interesting post, what do you your self think about UK press, what is the most popular newspaper?
I like the UK press -- it's mostly very good -- though it doesn't seem to try to be balanced.
The most-read papers -- the most "popular" papers -- are The Sun and the News of the World, both owned by media tycoon Rupert Murdoch. (Who also owns Sky News and Fox in America). Both of these papers are very good in terms of getting exclusive "breaking news" stories -- but they're both full of fluff. There are loads of celebrity stories, half-naked women, and bizarre, quirky stories. (Rather than serious news).
Both of these papers are "red tops" and I don't personally trust what I read in them. But maybe I'm too sceptical.
Post a Comment