The Content Makers

Margaret Simons on Media

Public Interest Journalism - New Models

June 1, 2009 – 10:36 am, by Margaret Simons

Those of you who are still checking this blog - I am still alive, and will re-emerge in August. In the meantime, things are happening. Some of you will know that I am involved with Swinburne University in a couple of experimental projects seeking new ways forward for journalism. A media release about one of them is attached below. This news should break in Crikey later today.

Note that we are looking for board nominations. Please pass this on through your networks.

1 June 2009
For immediate release

New foundation to support public interest journalism
Swinburne University’s Institute for Social Research has established a not-for-profit foundation to help develop new models for funding and supporting journalism.

The Foundation for Public Interest Journalism will bring together journalists, publishers, academics and community representatives to develop and test the new models.

The institute’s director, professor Julian Thomas, has called for suitably qualified and experienced people from any of these sectors to nominate for membership of the foundation’s board.

Nominations should include a 500-word statement about the applicant’s relevant experience and what they can offer the foundation. They must be received by close of business on Tuesday 30 June.

Dr Margaret Simons, a journalist, author and lecturer at Swinburne, said the foundation was being developed because of concerns about the impact of the global collapse of the business models supporting traditional media forms.

“This is a serious threat to journalism, and therefore to the health of our society,” she said.

“We will be seeking support from philanthropic organisations and individuals who appreciate the importance of a healthy, active media for our society.”

Donations to the foundation will be tax deductible.

The foundation will support investigative, interactive journalism while exploring ways of making good journalism sustainable in the new media age.

It will fund worthy journalism projects initiated by either members of the public or practising journalists, and is likely to incorporate approaches from similar projects overseas, such as www.spot.us

Projects will be assessed on their capacity to serve the public interest, with priority given to issues that are under-reported by the traditional media.

As well as publishing works of journalism, the foundation will make a major contribution to journalism education and research.

The foundation is the brainchild of a group of journalists and publishers who have been working with Swinburne University over the past year.

It is expected to be operational by the end of 2009.

ENDS
_______________________________________________________
Media contacts:

Professor Julian Thomas
Ph: 03 9214 5466
Mob: 0410 569 457
Email: jthomas@swin.edu.au

Dr Margaret Simons
Ph: 03 6376 8907
Mob: 0411 254 478
Email: msimons@swin.edu.au

Comments (0) | Permalink

My absence

April 24, 2009 – 12:30 pm, by Margaret Simons

I have to apologise to the people who were becoming regular readers of this blog for my sudden absence, dating from about three weeks ago.

The reason is that I am presently writing a book, in collaboration with Malcolm Fraser, and the publisher (the formidable Louise Adler of Melbourne University Press) has made it clear to me that my deadline is just that, not a mere aspiration. I’m afraid this means that for the next few months, this blog will be more or less in recess.

I plan to return with renewed vigor in a couple of months. I may post a few things in the meantime, but I promise nothing. I hope you will all understand and forgive.

Comments (5) | Permalink

Jay Rosen’s Flying Seminar on the Future of News

March 26, 2009 – 11:01 pm, by Margaret Simons

Jay Rosen is quite simply the most exciting thinker on journalism and the future.

Those of us who were at the first Future of Journalism seminar in Sydney last year will remember his wonderful metaphor about media futures, in which he compared journalists to people forced to journey to a new land. Not all the boats will make it, so we have to send plenty. When we get there we will find that others are there before us, and we will no longer have exclusive claim to the territory. The challenge will be that faced by all migrants - working out how many of our old customs are still useful, and how many we should leave behind in the old country.

More prosaicly, Rosen’s latest post on his Pressthink blog is a collection of links, with commentary, on the future of news. As Rosen remarks, there have been a lot of posts around the world on this topic over the last month as so many newspapers approach the abyss.

Rosen’s concluding word echoes the pushing-out-many-boats metaphor. Let’s just hope some of us make it:

I don’t know what will replace the newspaper journalism we have relied on. It’s a terrible loss for the public when people who bought the public service dream lose their jobs providing that service, and realizing that dream. I do not look forward to explaining to my students the contractions in the job market and why they’re likely to continue for the near term. It feels grim to have to say: “There is no business model in news right now. We’re between systems.”

I honestly don’t know what’s next. But I’m a professor of it. So I’m supposed to know where journalism is headed. Instead of that, I have this: my flying seminar from the last month of trying to figure it out. You’re supposed to take the course and feel caught up. I’ve given you a lot of looks at it because the only solution I have to offer is pluralism itself: many funders, many paths, many players, and many news systems with different ideas about how to practice journalism for public good (and how to pay for it, along with who participates) alive at once.

The future of news is open, more entrepreneurial. Open can also mean broken, repair date unknown. If you know how the old one fell apart, it’s easier to put something new together. That’s the faith that makes a seminar like this fly.

Comments (3) | Permalink

What will the Katies do Next? Two New Directors at the ABC

March 26, 2009 – 10:51 pm, by Margaret Simons

ABC Managing Director Mark Scott has appointed his two new members of senior management from inside the organisation.

Kate Dundas is the new Director of Radio, replacing Sue Howard, whose departure was one of the first news stories I covered on this blog. Dundas’s appointment is no surprise. She has been acting in the post since Howard’s departure, and was widely tipped as the permanent replacement. Her present post is as Director of People and Learning, in which she was involved in the recent stuff-up around the ABC’s industrial negotiations, which I reported on here.  She has previously been head of national networks for ABC Radio. She was the natural successor, and despite the recent industrial imbroglio one hears more good than bad about her from ABC insiders - and that’s about as much as any ABC executive can hope for. In the media release announcing the appointments, Scott emphasised Dundas’s “depth of experience in…strategic reform”, which is what radio needs. Lack of strategic thinking was perceived as being the reason for Howard’s forced departure.

A slightly more surprising appointment (well, I didn’t predict it :-) ) is Kate Torney as the new Director of News. Torney is presently Head, Asia Pacific News, and has previously been Executive Producer of the TV program Insiders. She has also worked as Producer Stateline (Victoria), a reporter, producer and Bureau Chief 7.30 Report and a reporter for ABC Radio and TV News. This is the first time that ABC News has been headed up by a woman, and while I wouldn’t want to make too much of that, it may help settle what can be a blokey and at its worst bullying culture in some of the state-based newsrooms. Probably more important is that Torney is an innovator, and new-media savvy, having overseen the introduction of broadcast technology to the Australia Network newsroom. The introduction of automated studios for news has not been trouble free. Torney presumably has been there and done that before. Perhaps it was her new media thinking that gave her the edge over the likely candidates I did identify, Craig McMurtrie and Alan Sunderland, both of whom would have been “steady as she goes” predictable appointments.

What do ABC people think of these appoinitments? Tips and opinions received in confidence at margaret@margaretsimons.com.au.

Comments (1) | Permalink

My Only Outing….

March 26, 2009 – 10:16 pm, by Margaret Simons

Just in case anyone is interested, here is some info about a gig I am doing soon, with Eric Beecher and George Megalogenis, to promote the book Best Australian Political Writing 2009. Given the aforementioned lunch with my publisher, this may be the only outing I get in the next three months. Why am I allowed this one? Same publisher, of course.

Comments (0) | Permalink

Fairfax After Acting for Free

March 26, 2009 – 10:12 pm, by Margaret Simons

Can this be true? Actors’ Equity claims that Fairfax is asking actors to perform for free. Here’s the memo that went out to members.

Dear Equity Members

We have become aware that Fairfax media is seeking to engage actors to perform in reconstructions of major crime events over the past century for their websites including The Sydney Morning Herald website and The Age website.

The proposal is that performers would perform this work for free.

The following points should be noted:

  • Equity has minimum rates of pay and conditions, including restrictions on use and residual payments for performers working in internet productions;
  • Similar programs (ie crime reconstructions) are produced for television where performers do receive as a minimum Equity rates of pay and conditions;
  • Fairfax Media is a commercial operation with interests in print, radio and online and has a present total value of just under $2.4 billion;
  • Fairfax Media has reported underlying net profits of $157.6 million for the six months to December 31 2009.

The internet and other new media are at the forefront of where actors income and jobs will be generated into the future.

Performers should not accept that work on these productions should be done for anything other than commercial rates of pay.  If performers were to accept this the future of performers earnings will be significantly undermined.

Fairfax has argued that performers will benefit from the exposure of their work on the websites.  On this logic performers would agree to work on Underbelly for free as their work will be exposed on Channel 9.

It should also be noted that Fairfax will be using this content in an attempt to drive up usage of its websites and in turn to drive up the fees advertisers pay to advertise on its websites.  Performers are being asked to assist in this endeavour but are not being offered any money for the privilege.

Equity has reached agreements with producers for the use of content created for the internet.  The issues covered in these agreements include will use be restricted to one or nominated websites, will the content be available for free or will users be paying a subscription fee to access the content or a pay per use fee, what other media can the content be used on, how long can the content be used, is the content only streamed or downloadable, what technological arrangements are in place to attempt to prevent manipulation of the performer’s performance by the end user, what additional use fees will performers be paid if the content is used other than for its original purpose.  The agreements also cover the usual rates of pay and conditions of employment enjoyed by performers in other productions.

Performers are advised not to audition for or accept work on these productions without the benefit of an Equity negotiated agreement.  If offered work in this production please contact Equity as a matter of urgency.

Many thanks for your support.

Simon Whipp

National Director

Comments (1) | Permalink

On Having Lunch With One’s Publisher

March 26, 2009 – 10:06 pm, by Margaret Simons

A few of you may have noticed that I have been blogging a bit less frequently over the last week. There is a reason. I had lunch with my publisher.

Yes, publishers’ lunches still exist, and this was a nice one, too, until…

She lowered the bar on my deadline. She made me so sick I couldn’t finish dessert.

This means that I am now right up against it to finish my book in time. As a result I have taken a sabbatical from writing for the Crikey email, and while I love this blog too much to give it up, it will have to play second fiddle and I won’t be able to chase the news anywhere near so hard.

I do hope to return to full strength later in the year. In the meantime, don’t stop sending me tips, and I will do my best to keep you variously  entertained, informed and outraged, if at a less frenetic pace.

Comments (2) | Permalink

Bloggers, Going Cheap

March 26, 2009 – 9:53 pm, by Margaret Simons

Duncan Riley,  “writer, developer, speaker and blogging evangelist” is looking for two to three bloggers for his site, The Inquisitr. The Australian-based Riley was one of the founders of the B5media blog network, which I worked for very briefly.

Anyway, he is offering to pay these bloggers - the depressingly low figure of $1.50 per thousand page views. Ouch, say those of us who earn a living from our writing.

But what’s even more interesting, and more depressing, is the results of his research into what bloggers elsewhere are paid (CPM, by the way, is cost per thousand page views):

  • Some sites pay nothing at all, instead promoting the benefits of exposure. It is staggering how many people will work for nothing, particularly if the idea is pitched right. It’s a nice game to get into, but it’s not one I’m comfortable in: I’d rather pay people something
  • Some sites pay, but only when the amount gets to something substantial (say $50-$100). These tend to be various rev share or CPM models. Many of these sites promote writers earning $200, or the occasional person hitting the $1000 mark. Most writers are lucky to earn $20 a month. Actually I’d love to get into this space, but not with The Inquisitr. Next project maybe :-) Again though: people will work for little, and in this market $50 or $100 a month is money people want
  • Some sites pay a set CPM monthly in the 50c-$1.50 CPM range. Hard to pin these rates down, because most don’t advertise the rates, but you can dig up the info on forums. I saw one site offering $1.50, and none higher, although this is not to say that some individual sites may pay more.
  • The remainng models are the givens: set rate per post, or monthly set rate with or without traffic bonus

Riley reckons that these new bloggers he is hiring will probably get manage to average at least $200 a month, for about 40 posts a month.

Ouch, ouch, ouch.

But if anyone is interested, more details here, and applications close next week.

Comments (2) | Permalink

A bouquet for The Age investigative team, and all who sail in her.

March 26, 2009 – 9:02 am, by Margaret Simons

The content makers are usually very good at spruiking their own virtues and I don’t usually assist them, but sometimes one really does have to give a bouquet among the brickbats.

This one is for the staff at The Age, and in particular the investigative team and the editors who allow it to continue to give time and serious attention to big stories. Today’s scoop about Defence spying on its Minister is only the latest example.

I am told that Age editorial staff are working in a building that is barely being maintained. Lifts break down and stay that way. The mood is gloomy. And yet, as one staff member put it to me the other day, all around there are nuggets of quality and a sort of gallows humour that keeps the staff moving on, even as the future looks uncertain,  nobody feels secure in their jobs and confidence in management is non-existent.

“It’s like being in Bali in the tourist areas,” this person said. “You’d think it would have been totally trashed, but instead you keep coming across these little shrines and offerings to the things that matter.”

I am sure the same is true in other newsrooms. I do not mean to imply that The Age is on its own in this, but the continuing commitment to investigative work at a time like this really should be applauded.

So, clap clap.

Comments (3) | Permalink

A Little More on News Limited and Features

March 25, 2009 – 10:54 am, by Margaret Simons

The current issue of Media Week contains an interview by Rachel Bolton with News Limited’s Campbell Reid, in which he says a little more about the mystery plan to restructure News Limited’s features. Naturally, he emphasises that it is all about good journalism, while acknowledging that there may also be redundancies.

As for exactly what is planned, Reid talks about editors working “more and more in tandem”. In this context, Alan Oakley as national editor, features, is trying to “align all our features sections” so they deliver value to print readers, advertisers and online readers.

Perhaps the main thing that is new in all this is that Reid clearly indicates the plans are some way off.

“Alan is working on a plan for how we deliver that and we’ll be talking to editors and managing directors over the next weeks and months to get their buy in and discuss how we go about producing those outcomes, what the products are and when they appear.”

It all sounds a lot less definite, and less imminent, than News Limited staff were led to believe in briefings a few weeks ago. Which makes me wonder why those briefings were given.

As for the publications working more closely together, that is certainly true.

News is in the process of installing the CyberPage editorial system across all sites, including regionals.  Everything will then be standardised, including the way desks are named and keyboard shortcuts work. A real one-size-fits-all.

Meanwhile, Reid insists that while there will be more redundancies, there are no targets or set numbers in mind.

Comments (2) | Permalink