bad for journalism, terrible for pr

it is sometimes joked about in public relations (pr) circles, that the slashing of journalism budgets will be a boon for pr professionals. the truth is the decline in good journalism starts us down a path that neuters one of the most powerful checks and balances in a democratic society.

keeping the bastards honest

if this is the only thing that you remember about the australian democrats, etch it fast.

a democratic society exists in a state of fluid contention. one side can never have too much power, because what we do know about power is that it corrupts. to this end, most of our power structures are such that there is always a counterpoint, hence:

• a bicameral system of parliament
• separation of powers between the executive, legislative and judicial branches
• government and opposition
• prosecution and defence
• mcdonalds and kfc (i might be joking here)

if we didn’t have this system, power shifts to one group and then we have a problem.

public opinion

public opinion, and consequently consent, is where all our human institutions derive their power. much of that opinion is informed by the media (old or new). the media is where we tell our stories, and stories are told of us. these stories over time form reputation, credibility and ultimately for a basis for power. be that market power, social power or governmental power. power influences consent.

the hacks

we rely on the hacks to watch our institutions and ensure that the public are informed on what they are doing, so that we, the people, can give our consent. we rely on them to be honest, accurate and fair. as humans though, their stories will be coloured from their experiences and biases. this is often not a problem because often an experienced journalist with have insights that add value and interest to a story.

unfortunately, this is not always the case. bad news sells better than good news and a scandal is always titillating. coming at a story from a negative angle is always juicier.

the flacks

as flacks, we are the advocates for our clients. we tell our client’s stories from a positive angle and always with our best foot forward. this is neither a secret nor is it an earth shattering revelation. for us good news is always better than bad news, and a scandal is a nightmare. besides telling everyone anytime we have good news, we try to limit the damage of bad news.

this hack/flack contention, hopefully draws us somewhere to the middle of the road, and as close to the perception of truth as humanly possible. this system of story telling gives us as a society a balance of power.

the decline of good journalism

advertising revenues are drying up and media houses flounder trying to find an online model monetisation model. money is not being spent on good journalism and funding longer well researched pieces, rather journalists are being asked to churn out x number of stories per day.

this skews the power balances and this is not a good thing. In the long term, this means that the power starts to shifts to one group, the flacks.

i’m sure we’re a wonderful bunch but we are we are human and definitely not the untouchables. we are part of a symbiotic system that ultimately only works when there is equal representation on both sides.

i’m not sure what the strategy to monetise will be. there are ideas floating around. i do believe that with every media downsizing the checks stop balancing.