Beyond clickbait and commerce

Recommendations

Info

While there is no universally accepted definition of media development, media for development, media assistance nor independent media, the normative assumption is that activity should support media systems that promote freedom of expression, plurality and diversity, strengthened media capacity, and professional training and skills development (GFMD 2008). The logic has been creating external pluralism through different media companies operating in one country to build democracy, assure access and voice to citizens. Scholars have explored how media can raise awareness and affect accountability (Bratic 2006; Becker 2011), and freedom of the media is highly correlated with broader political freedoms (Karlekar and Becker 2014). Although the effect is arguable, reductions in restrictions on journalists can have a positive impact on corruption (Brunetti and Weder 2003; Chowdhury 2004). On the face of it, media development responds to challenges through an integrated model of support to tackle a deficiency of business skills, lack of market data and increasingly audience research (Foster 2014). RESEARCH PAPER Which media funding models are most appropriate, however, is much contested. Promoting external pluralism via private media, funded by traditional choice-driven advertising and sales revenues, is questionable, given the current flaws and crisis in the ‘free market’ model (Peters 2010; Higgins 2014). Instead, low- or nointerest loans, public funding or subsidies are more likely to support quality, transparent media systems. Research in emerging markets suggests ‘high levels of competition in markets with limited advertising revenues may lead to poor journalistic performance’ (Becker et al. 2009). Rather, if it is accepted that media play a role in democratic society – and a policy briefing by the BBC Media Action highlights the ‘urgent relevance’ of public service media in fragile states (Harding 2015) – it could follow that this public good should receive public support or some form of subsidy or funding intervention. But donor funding can create a cycle of dependency undermining efforts to earn revenues. Reviewing the impact of donor media assistance in sub-Saharan Africa, Myers (2014) finds that it has, discouraging movement towards advertiser-funded highaudience content. Either way, according to Berger (2010) ‘there seems to be an underplaying of business aspects and sustainability issues as a necessary feature for rendering a particular mediascape “developed”’. Most recently, grant organisations have moved away from funding media directly in favour of tiered support across development stages, projects or initiatives. According to media NGO International Press Centre: ‘Media centres will have to creatively think of rendering services for which they could receive payment so as to be able to meet aspects of their operational costs’ (CIMA 2007). Equally, members of IFEX, the global freedom of expression network, reported it had become ‘strikingly more difficult to obtain funding Copyright 2016-2/3. Ethical Space: The International Journal of Communication Ethics. All rights reserved. Vol 13, No 2/3 2016 69
Clare Cook for their work’ (Becker and Vlad 2009). FOJO Media Institute ended a three-year programme to support exile media in 2016. At Open Society Foundations the sort of journalism being practised now drives funding decisions rather than political conditions of a country. Previously they felt maybe they received grants simply because they existed and their work was important. Now they have to improve, get grants to perform better, to increase their impact on audiences. Many of our partners, after the initial shock, came to grips with the new reality and surprised us with great ideas. So the aim is really to make our partners stronger, improve their ability to be independent and survive the challenging market place and explore alternative digital business models (Ronderos 2015). In response, some oppositional news outlets are attempting to diversify their revenue. While a precise typology of exiled and restricted media does not exist, they share characteristics with nonprofit charities that seek to prioritise a public service mission more than for-profit revenues. This resonates with the investigative Latin- American journalism non-profit sector (Requejo-Aleman and Lugo- Ocando 2014). In some cases there has been piecemeal success: in digital inclusion projects in India, South Africa and Brazil (Madon et al. 2009) revenue successes were managed around donations, or partnerships with NGOs, but otherwise long-term indigenous revenue streams were difficult to find. A study of 35 independent media, some of which were in repressive regimes, identified four main challenges being faced by news producers: editorial, business, distribution and security. Innovation in business models occurs separately from content innovation (Robinson et al. 2015). These pressures produce a new set of pragmatic and ethical challenges: independent media cannot exist without a viable business model (LaMay 2006) yet this creates a tension between information as a public service and operating a sustainable business. In a modern digital landscape, capturing readers without neglecting journalistic values is a recurrent tension. For some the ethical concern lies with private funding and the risk of bias, where company interests may feature more or less prominently in news agendas (Barnett and Townend 2015: 175). For others, the interests of audiences and advertisers are considered when selecting news (Beam 2003). Exiled media are not alone in having to gain readers, be more discoverable or make news more engaging (Batsell 2015). Some outlets have developed more light-hearted news stories (lifestyle, popular content or human interest) particularly to appeal to younger audiences (FOJO 2013: 22). In such a case, McManus (1992) would justify the strategy given the fragility of oppositional news: ‘Only when profits are too small to sustain the 70 Copyright 2016-2/3. Ethical Space: The International Journal of Communication Ethics. All rights reserved. Vol 13, No 2/3 2016
Page 1 and 2:
Beyond clickbait and commerce The e
Page 4 and 5:
Contents Editorial Looking beyond t
Page 6 and 7:
EDITORIAL Looking beyond the tradit
Page 8 and 9:
These questions of independence are
Page 10 and 11:
of the work produced by foundation-
Page 12 and 13:
Crisis Center, for example, has a g
Page 14 and 15:
library that spotlights progress in
Page 16 and 17:
journalists working on the developm
Page 18 and 19:
Note on the contributor Dr Mel Bunc
Page 20 and 21:
2014). One response has been to par
Page 22 and 23: and/or distributed by ENGOs to mobi
Page 24 and 25: democratic dissent’, while DeLuca
Page 26 and 27: ecording the interviews, I engaged
Page 28 and 29: spent two weeks collecting images a
Page 30 and 31: Although photographs of spirit bear
Page 32 and 33: up the article ‘Pipeline through
Page 34 and 35: Alexandra Garcia, iLCP communicatio
Page 36 and 37: killed/, accessed on 27 December 20
Page 38 and 39: Dave Harte ‘Tell it like it is’
Page 40 and 41: Veronica Coatham and Lisa Martinali
Page 42 and 43: which content its audience is most
Page 44 and 45: in the 1990s and early 2000s. Borge
Page 46 and 47: in Leeds, he notes the valuable rol
Page 48 and 49: Yet the nature of the journalism at
Page 50 and 51: Foucault, Michel (1980) Power/Knowl
Page 52 and 53: Unitec research colleagues; media p
Page 54 and 55: voice in seven unique contexts was
Page 56 and 57: therefore, challenging to strike th
Page 58 and 59: 7 The Pacifica Mamas, ‘matriarchs
Page 60 and 61: sharing approach to collaboration,
Page 62 and 63: programme, and they wanted the spot
Page 64 and 65: and that I was entrusting myself to
Page 66 and 67: ecosystem (Cooren 2015b). In a 2015
Page 68 and 69: Saifoloi, Malama, Stowers-Ama, Jarc
Page 70 and 71: informed citizenry. Most see journa
Page 74 and 75: news organisation are decisions to
Page 76 and 77: is largely seen as unethical to ask
Page 78 and 79: open to paying for content. Others
Page 80 and 81: Conclusions Overall, oppositional n
Page 82 and 83: Foster, Michelle (2012) Calling the
Page 84 and 85: Judith Townend ‘Charitable journa
Page 86 and 87: In the second category, where the r
Page 88 and 89: Among the issues is the Charity Com
Page 90 and 91: House of Lords (2012) House of Lord
Page 92 and 93: press in a democracy to campaign, l
Page 94 and 95: The tribunal’s decision For the p
Page 96 and 97: charitable journalism may be recogn
Page 98 and 99: Denis Muller Conflict of interest:
Page 100 and 101: Tanner et al. (2005: 187) identify
Page 102 and 103: to its audiences. To engage in jour
Page 104 and 105: creating a commercial climate in wh
Page 106 and 107: that a sponsor would have no role i
Page 108 and 109: Items about Dove not labelled as sp
Page 110 and 111: their public-interest responsibilit
Page 112 and 113: Murtha, Jack and Gourarie, Chava (2
Page 114 and 115: Recognising the shadow elements of
Page 116 and 117: admits that ‘systematic’ may be
Page 118 and 119: Rather than ethics being an issue t
show all

Beyond clickbait and commerce

Create successful ePaper yourself

Delete template?

Save as template?