Letter from the Society of Editors
The Society of Editors has more than 400 members
in national, regional and local newspapers, broadcasting, magazines,
new media, mediea education and media law.
The committee has or will be hearing from some
of our members in national newspapers and the Newspaper Society,
which represents publishers in the regional press, has submitted
a detailed response.
In general terms, the society reflects and endorses
the various views of its members and supports the submission made
by the Newspaper Society on behalf of regional publishers.
How and why have the agendas of news providers
changed? How has the content of news programmes and newspapers
altered over the years?
The agenda of news providers changes in response
to the needs and aspirations of their audiences and potential
audiences. All news providers carefully research and target their
selected markets. Their agendas and the various platforms for
the provision of news therefore reflect social and economic changes
and changes in technology. The industry is converging so that
is increasingly being delivered by multimedia companies rather
than organisations that could simply be described as publishers
or broadcasters.
Detailed content of news programmes or publications
has therefore changed substantially over time. This has been affected
by changes in working hours and relative wealth that has provided
potential customers with more choice in activities and the ability
to fund those activities. While average issue reading time for
publications may in many cases have been reduced, there are many
more publications just as there are many more new outlets facilitated
by technological changes. At the same time the provision of news
and other content has increased dramatically in both publications
and across the range of electronic and digital platforms. Newspapers
have continued to expand in pagination and sections, and each
media platform feeds and encourages others, as well as competing
with them.
Many news organisations have had to adapt to
become "multi-channel"—feeding various publications—print,
radio, TV and on-line. Content for different channels is now in
many forms and sizes—not just one story, one size.
The agenda has been affected by this explosion
of media outlets—print, TV, radio, websites and niche—
in the last two decades. Many news providers give breaking news,
and some of this is free-of-charge, which provides extra challenges
for those in the paid-for market.
With more information available, the search
for exclusive news has become paramount, and analysis and explanation
are now crucial points of the agenda.
How is the way that people access news gathering
changing? The Committee is interested in national and regional
trends and figures for television, radio, newspaper and on-line
news consumption
As suggested above social, economic and technological
changes have and continue to transform the way that news is accessed.
The committee has been provided with detailed figures demonstrating
some of these changes by other sources.
How has the process of newsgathering changed?
The Committee is interested in the process of news production,
the prioritisation of budgets and the deployment of journalistic
resources
Investment in news and other editorial content
that is credible and meets the needs of potential audiences remains
the first key step for any media operator. That builds audience
that creates a platform for advertising that creates the revenue
to pay for more content and to provide profit.
Against the background of dramatic and rapid
change the economics of all sectors of the media has changed and
continues to change. More and varied platforms create greater
competition for audience and increased pressures on costs, particularly
those associated with news gathering and the creation of other
content that is expensive.
In the case of newspapers, there was a time
when editorial budgets could be related to revenue generated by
circulation. Advertising revenue could then be earmarked to cover
other costs and and contribute to profits. As audiences are dissipated
across the increasing forms of news provision, it is clearly impractical
to follow the simple rule of thumb that editorial costs could
be kept in line with circulation revenue. As audiences are spread
more thinly and there are more competing platforms for advertising
clearly editorial budgets and resources are challenged.
What is the impact of the concentration of media
ownership on the balance and diversity of opinion seen in the
news? Does ownership have an impact on editorial priorities and
on news values such as fairness, accuracy and impartiality?
While there is concentration of media ownership,
there is also increasing diversity in the media and barriers to
entry into the marketplace have never been lower. Media ownership
has a variety of forms but they all seek commercial success based
on the quality of their content that is tailored to their chosen
market. Audience building requires the creation of credible content
and fairness, accuracy and impartiality are key factors in establishing
and maintaining acceptability and credibility. The ethics of media
organisations has a direct impact on their performance in the
market place. The days of the old fashioned press baron who controlled
the press for their benefit of their own egos, tastes and ideologies
are long gone.
Media owners now have more transparent priorities
concerning profits rather than politics. Direct interference in
strictly editorial issues is not the problem. Recognition of the
long term need to invest in content and to maintain editorial
standards is a concern, when final decisions about editorial budgets
may be in the hands of individuals or organisations who invest
solely for financial reasons and have only a distant interest
in the nature and quality of the product.
How should the public interest be protected and
defined in terms of news provision? Are the public interest considerations
set down for Ofcom in the Communications Act 2003 enough to ensure
a plurality of debating voices in the UK news media?
There is a clear public interest in the vitality
of the news media in all its forms and diversity.
Against a background of increased competiton
for audiences and revenues there is now greater need to protect
the independence and freedom of the media to question and report
on behalf of the public.
There are powerful general legal contraints
on ownership sufficient to safeguard the plurality of the media.
There should be fewer rather than more constraints on media ownerhip.
Similarly, there should be less rather than more regulation of
the media. The danger is that an industry that is already challenged
by rapid change could be further damaged by artificial constraints.
Instead the government should be encouraging the media in its
key role in a democratic society.
The committee had been made aware of concerns
about the expansion of news services by the BBC into new areas
and formats that could constitute unfair competition. Other media
organisations do not benefit from public funding.
The media derives its freedom from the wider
public right to freedom of expression. It asks for no special
privileges but in return rejects any special controls. There is
a clear public interest in encouraging a free, unfettered media
that is already regulated by the demands of discerning audiences
and a fiercely competitive market place.
1 September 2007
| 
