an exchange on a public discussion forum caught my eye today. An excerpt below, I've edited it to protect their pseudonyms (and yes I see the silliness in that):
Person one:
another thing that interests me is that the species of indepth, thoughtful, well-researched writerly journalism i like to link to seems to be rare in australia. is this the result of the age and smh getting gutted? or do journalism schools here not teach that kind of indepth journalism?
Person two:
it's very expensive and no one in australia is willing to pay for it.
also, in the places that do publish long pieces, there seems to be a trend of favouring analysis over reporting.
that said journals like overland, meanjin, griffith review and mags like the monthly do publish some great stuff occasionally.
Person three:
i think it's a financial issue. investigative journalist phillip knightley gave a talk when i was back at uni studying journalism on the time and cost of true investigative journalism, and how it was basically already dead or dying in australia - and this was back in 1998 or so. so i think that's just a situation that has continued to grow now that we have this constant imperative for fast news (which is about as substantial as fast food).
in america in particular, there would still be a niche for this type of journalism, and the budget to support it, even if it is a smaller budget than what it once was. i don't think that it is so much the quality of the writing that we lack in aust (although i am not sure we have too many truly poetic writers contributing to the mainstream press), but the quality of the research. and that is, as always, a financial thing. we are just too small a nation of news readers to demand it i think.
Person four:
it's historically and culturally more established than it ever was in Australia as well. from the New Yorker to the Village Voice, channels for that style of journalism have had a decent presence in the American consciousness, much as the New Statesman and the Spectator (blergh x 5000) have in the UK. the closest we've ever had was the Bulletin in its turn-of-the-century heyday, and ACP managed to gut it and turn it to unit-shifting shite in short-order.
Person five:
It's also a result of the increasing magazine-ification of news. Things like The Week are probably the most palatable result of this unfortunate happening.
Person three:
i think it's a financial issue. investigative journalist phillip knightley gave a talk when i was back at uni studying journalism on the time and cost of true investigative journalism, and how it was basically already dead or dying in australia - and this was back in 1998 or so. so i think that's just a situation that has continued to grow now that we have this constant imperative for fast news (which is about as substantial as fast food).
in america in particular, there would still be a niche for this type of journalism, and the budget to support it, even if it is a smaller budget than what it once was. i don't think that it is so much the quality of the writing that we lack in aust (although i am not sure we have too many truly poetic writers contributing to the mainstream press), but the quality of the research. and that is, as always, a financial thing. we are just too small a nation of news readers to demand it i think.
Person four:
it's historically and culturally more established than it ever was in Australia as well. from the New Yorker to the Village Voice, channels for that style of journalism have had a decent presence in the American consciousness, much as the New Statesman and the Spectator (blergh x 5000) have in the UK. the closest we've ever had was the Bulletin in its turn-of-the-century heyday, and ACP managed to gut it and turn it to unit-shifting shite in short-order.
Person five:
It's also a result of the increasing magazine-ification of news. Things like The Week are probably the most palatable result of this unfortunate happening.
True, who in Australia is prepared to invest in indepth, quality journalism these days?
Posts
2 comments:
Good question. Who in Australia will invest in great journalism? I hope someone does soon.
It's cheaper to keep us all stupid.
a properly functioning democracy requires investigative journalism to serve the watchdog function. It's just not happening anymore - think Murdoch who believes it's his role to use mass media to manipulate the outcome of elections. With the democrats no longer around, who will 'keep the bastards honest'?
Post a Comment