Quality journalism is a two-way street…historically speaking

Recently the New York Times ran a story , “When the News Wasn’t New” that a current exhibit at the Folger Shakespeare Library on Capital Hill demonstrates there has been cynicism about the art and science of gathering and reporting of news and opinion since the professions’ erstwhile “official” beginnings some 360 years ago in England. It seems that much of the criticism at that long ago time was centered upon, “no wisdom…just much posturing and gossip.”

It goes on to state that, “It is strange to think that the genetic code of modern journalistic culture was laid down four centuries ago in England, mixing hype and high seriousness, incorporating battles over press freedoms, suffused with a spirit of competition and a need for marketing. The newspaper, we also see, evolved as the creator and mirror of its public.” (Nothing mentioned about public relations in this exhibit, but alas you just know there were PR-types in tights, floppy hats, and quill pens pushing that “hype” referred to above. But more on that later.)

Somewhere I hear that oft-used and much abused cliché… The more things change, the more they stay the same

Except the profession is in real danger this time of folding in upon itself, as it undergoes its latest metamorphosis from tangible printed page to a digital social digest due to dramatically changing technology and a younger audience eager to embrace it. Coupled with a crippling economy, these forces are driving the business side of journalism to dictate the quality of its product like never before in the 360-year history. While the conflict of cost versus editorial quality is as old as the profession itself (or any other for that matter,) the wholesale whittling down of both staff and infrastructure has definitely given rise to a much weaker editorial product.

There are those on the shadier side of the PR profession that look at this as a good thing, not a problem…believing that since those inside the media are weaker and the news holes to be filled, larger, the opportunity to gain coverage of clients, deserving or not, has increased exponentially. The rest of us (with whom I prefer to number myself) however, recognize this means we must work ever harder, and in tandem with the media to see that our clients’ stories fit the new and different demands of those on the media side grappling with these changes while still trying to be journalistically sound.

The media has a responsibility as well, in spite of its economic and transition woes. Those on the editorial side that truly care about their profession need to stay vigilant and proactive in preserving quality and integrity in their gathering and reporting. The good editors, reporters and producers that survive (and we all know who they are…or should be) must not let themselves be replaced by expeditious ineptitude under the guise of budget efficiency…i.e., laziness and penny pinching.

How can we help keep them employed and working with us, not against us? Deliver them real news story ideas and pitches that demonstrate understanding and respect of the media for which they work…not tripe and puffery. Bring them news that can be conveniently researched and reported…i.e., make them look good to their boss. In return, let them know (politely, of course…hey, it’s still the media) when they don’t show you similar professionalism and respect in their reporting or broadcast. Demand the same standards from them as they expect from us…solid homework, grasping of the facts, and an intelligent presentation.

With a little work and mutual respect, who knows…maybe we’ll both be around for another few hundred years…but I’m glad we lost the tights!