Want better media? Don’t take the bait

At no other time in history has the link between the consumers and the producers of news been more direct. Yet at the same time “the media” faces unprecedented public criticism and is on the verge of an existential crisis.

Most people understand that the digital revolution is responsible for the decline in the quality and quantity of journalism, but the issue is far more complex than video killing the radio star.

The rapid growth of free and fast online news sources has meant that consumers have turned away from their comparatively slow and expensive print competitors.

Social media took breaking news away from news organisations, and blogs and other digital news platforms that were cheap, quick and relatively easy to produce, truly democratised the distribution of media.

This made it difficult for existing news organisations to compete — even if they went digital.

As the number of print readers dwindled, advertisers naturally started looking elsewhere and directed their spending towards where they thought they would gain the most impact.

They measured this impact in the same way that they measured impact in oldfashioned print; the number of eyeballs on page, or “traffic”. The result was that the advertising revenue that was the commercial mainstay of print journalism gradually — then very quickly — fell away.

But the real curveball came from Facebook and Google. As more and more people started using Google and Facebook as their primary sources of news, the traffic on these sites outstripped even the most competent of online news organisations.

To put the effect of Facebook and Google into perspective, consider that more than 90c out of every R1 spent on online advertising in SA goes to these two sites alone.

The effect on journalism globally, and especially in SA, has been staggering.

Falling revenues have forced publishers to drastically cut costs, resulting in smaller, more junior newsrooms and, ultimately, less money to spend on journalism.

More importantly, it meant that journalists are encouraged to chase stories that generate the most traffic, and not chase the stories that are in the public interest.

In some cases it has even resulted in publishers pressuring editors to pander to advertisers by avoiding stories that may be sensitive to them.

The result was what we see in the media today. Speed is often prioritised over accuracy, click-bait is rife, and the financial and time pressures on “digital first” newsrooms have left little time for in-depth reporting and have driven many experienced journalists out of the industry.

So what should you do if you are unhappy with the quality of the journalism you consume?

The easy answer is that you should pay for all news you consume, but there is another — completely free — way that consumers of news can influence what is published. If you really want to change the journalistic landscape, don’t read the clickbait.

As awful as it is, the old journalistic adage “if it bleeds, it leads” still holds true. The problem is that the stories that tend to attract the most clicks are not normally in the public’s best interest and are seldom socially beneficial.

This means that so long as readers choose to read horror stories over sober and balanced reporting, news outlets will continue to publish sensational and divisive stories that drive online debate and outrage at the expense of solid daily reporting.

But there is a way to turn the model on its head. We know that the more clicks a story gets, the more advertising revenue a publication receives.

When tens of thousands of people click on a story it creates a commercial imperative for an editor to invest more resources into it. In other words, if you think before you click, you can change the direction of editorial decisions in real time.

If we want those responsible for the death of more than 133 mentally ill people under the care of the Gauteng health department to be held to account, then we need to read more stories about the Life Esidimeni tragedy and not a listicle on “10 common signs that you might have cancer”.

Similarly, if you spend your time googling the gruesome details of Jamal Khashoggi’s last moments rather than Saudi Arabia’s foreign policy stance, you can’t complain that the media is ignoring the Saudi’s vested interests in SA.

The bottom line is that if you read good journalism, you will incentivise newsrooms to produce more good journalism.

And trust me, the click-bait stories won’t make you thinner, happier or better informed.

You’re just a click away from the power of influencing journalism