Need some Inspiration? Why journalism must thrive in the digital era

Michael Oreskes, executive editor of the International Herald Tribune, gave a keynote speech on "Audiences, citizens and the future of journalism" that I found inspiring.
Oreskes just helped write a book on the foundations of our democracy, and his take on how the challenges of the current digital age fit into historical trends was thought-providing. Here are my notes of the highlights:


Going to many journalism conventions is like attending a wake for someone who's not dead yet.

The panic is so great.
The panic is wrong, the future of journalism is bright.
but the challenge is substantial and how we solve it will shape the future of journalism and the future of democracy.

I believe the future of journalism is bright because we have the largest audience in the world hungry for what we do. but we do need to need to build new models.

Some of what works best on the internet works against what democracies need to remain strong.
fragmentation is reality. it's a business and democratic challenge.
Elbert Hubbard worked as a special correspondent for Hearst long enough to come up with this definition of journalism: "It's the editors' job to separate the wheat from the chaff and to see that the chaff is published."
Our job is to separate, sort, choose
Our audience is literally drowning in information. like in grain silo with grain being pored in from on top.
Is this overload a problem? No, it's an opportunity, one we can't afford to miss
Business is in a time of crisis.
Mathias Döpfner, top German publisher, told his editors not to commit suicide out of fear of dying.
what is the panic about? what does he mean?

It is only partly true that newspaper circulation is declining, paid circulation in North America and Europe is declining, yes, but total circulation of papers, including free, is increasing. that's not even counting large and rapid growing audiences on the internet.
Knowledge of our rapidly changing world is great and perhaps as great as it has ever been.
The passion with which people respond to stories is a good sign.
Interest in printed newspapers actually goes up with online readers when they are seeking context and analysis
For example, sales of the International Herald Tribune went up 20 percent after London bombings, interest apparently fueled by online reports.

So, it's really a business model crisis. We have fewer people who want to pay for news, and advertisers have more ways to reach customers.

These extraordinary business pressures threaten our ability to practice journalism.
But the solution is journalism. No one in their real life has time to absorb all that info, journalists are (still) needed to separate wheat from the chaff
the more society is inundated with information the more we need journalism, but the increasing sources of information have undermined business model that sustains the journalism.

What's the future of journalism? transparency, ability to interact. We're no longer gatekeepers, maybe guides, referees, Greek chorus
It is clear what we should not become: we must not be just conveyer belts.
We add something important, we are independent observers of the world, with no agenda other than to help audiences absorb the world.
Our obligation is to the truth, loyalty to citizens, discipline of verification
We must maintain our independence, serve as independent monitor of power, forum for public criticism and compromise, make the news significant interesting and relevant, keep news comprehensive and proportional, exercise personal conscience

We have to listen to aggregators, bloggers - pamphleteers & internet strength -
but we must keep our core values to create a new future of journalism.

How we shape the future of journalism is very related to the future of democracy:
- the greater the press freedom, the greater national income per person.
- as press freedom goes up, corruption goes down. countries with free press are cleaner and wealthier, don't let anyone tell you that what we do doesn't matter.

The demand for quality news and info will remain strong

James Madison - knowledge will forever govern ignorance, and people who mean to be own governors must arm selves with power knowledge gives them
Unlimited freedom of everyone pursing own interests as in 1776-87 showed that's not a good thing - you must have a system that enables compromise.

The internet is pushing in the opposite direction, toward greater specialization, less need to encounter people who we don't agree with

The essence of democratic society is the recognition that the world doesn't orient around any one of us, but all of us, audience, consumers, and citizens. vertical (organization of news content) is opposite of democratic, encourage specialization, good for biz, but we need to do more.

We as journalists need to find a way to make our websites have the democratic values of a newspaper, serendipity.

We can bring different people together. democracy does not function well unless people are exposed to people whose views they don't agree with or that they didn't even know about.

A diversity of voices has always been good journalism, and true democratization. If we can build that we will have built not only a bright future for journalism but a bright future for democracy as well.
(If you want to read the whole thing, Mike put his speech online.)