Spot the news editor

November 25th, 2009

In California, you can be your own virtual news editor, getting journalists to cover stories you think are important. If, that is, enough people agree with you that it is worth paying a few dollars for the story.
Through the website www.spot.us, you can deal directly with journalists looking for work.

This is how it happens: you submit a news tip off through the website, or a journalist pitches a story and the cost of doing it. Everyone who wants to see the story done contributes a few dollars – what they are calling community funding. When there is enough money, the story gets done and posted on the website – and hopefully used also by other outlets.

Here is a typical pitch on the site: “The Bay area is one of the most food-oriented regions in the country, and yet school lunches served in Oakland public schools suffer from the same problems seen in most districts in the nation – too much fat, not enough fresh fruit and vegetables … “

Reporter Sierra Filucci promises to deliver a 1 500 article with multiple sources, several photographs, some “basic” video and a “take action” sidebar, telling you what you can do to help the campaign. You can read her CV and some of her previous work, to see if she is a decent journalist.

Like the story? You can donate a few dollars for her to do it. The cost is based on a Spot.us pricing guideline and she will only proceed if enough people donate. Instead of cash, you can also give her tips or donate “talent”– that is, assist her with the story. The website offers her peer editing (though other freelancers) and helps her place her story in conventional media as widely as possible.

Filucci’s school lunch story has been fully funded and is going ahead. Still looking for money is an investigation of why San Francisco’s new earthquake-safe bridge is running late and over-budget. “Where did the money go?” the reporter will ask.

This investigation will cost just over $7 000. A publisher has contributed $5 000 and they suggest you donate as little as $4 – the cost of one bridge-crossing.

The site had a breakthrough recently when the New York Times carried one of their stories - a sign of fundamental change in the media. A few years ago, the Times would never have accepted a story generated in this way.

Is this the ultimate in community journalism? Does it take away the power of media owners, editors and others to determine from the cosiness of their offices what stories are important and worth doing – and give the power back to communities to set their own agendas?

Could you envisage the people of Orange Farm each giving a few rands to a reporter to investigate a teacher sexually harassing their children at school, or a builder who is putting up lousy houses, or a politician who never visits her constituency? It might be a few rand better spent than on an existing newspaper which might be less likely to cover the story.

There are dangers. Those with money can have greater influence over the choice of stories than others, and they can target their rivals or enemies. The site has to be vigilant to prevent abuse.

But it is more transparent than any other form of journalism I know of: on the site you can see what stories are being done, who is funding it, and follow what happens as it unfolds.

Or course, the site still needs conventional media to pick up the story for it to have impact. But it offers a powerful alliance of new and old media to change the way reporting is done and news agendas are set.

This is one of many experiments in how to fund journalism in a world where the traditional model of advertising-funded newsrooms is in decline. You can see how many and where journalists have been laid off in the US on an interactive map at a site called Paper Cuts: over 14 000 this year so far, on top of 16 000 last year. You can also see a map of newspapers closed in the last three years – a swarm of black dots on a map of the country.

Ideas for funding journalism range from the French model – where the state is throwing €1,2-bn at newspaper subsidies (12% of the industry’s revenue) – to South Africa, where the state is proposing a special tax to pay for public service media.

The French model is hotly debated. The government offers a free once-a-week subscription to a daily paper for any 18-24-year-old. They can choose between 59 newspapers (yes they still have that many) and the first 200 000 people who apply get it for a year (2% of that age group).

Critics say that most of those who take advantage were already reading newspapers and that it is encouraging profligacy among the papers, few of whom are doing much on their pages to hold youth.
In the US, there is a rapid increase in foundation-funded non-profit investigative journalism.

Philanthropists are giving money to investigative teams to do their work outside of the demands of conventional newsrooms.

A few months ago, 25 US NGOs issued what was called the Pocantico Declaration, forming a non-profit investigative journalism network. At a time when investigative reporting is under threat, “there is an urgent need to nourish and sustain the emerging investigative journalism ecosystem to better serve the public”, they said.

This kind of collaboration is new in a field which was traditionally competitive, secretive and individualistic. They will share stories, resources and attempts to build new business models for their work. The internet is facilitating a new network-based society of cooperation and sharing and an entirely different relationship between journalist and consumer.

ProPublica, a website dedicated to “journalism in the public interest”, was formed two years ago by established senior journalists, Paul Steiger, a former managing editor of the Wall Street journal, and Stephen Engelberg, former managing editor of the Oregonian..

“Investigative journalism is at risk. Many news organizations have increasingly come to see it as a luxury,” they say on their site. “This is therefore a moment when new models are necessary to carry forward some of the great work of journalism in the public interest.”

Their site is a hive of investigative stories on every possible subject.

In London, the David and Elaine Potter Foundation (started by two former South Africans) are funding an investigations unit at City University, which houses the Centre for Investigative Journalism.

Back home, the Mail & Guardian have begun a similar venture, separating out its much-respected investigative team and raising foundation money to support it. The Open Society Fund has given them substantial backing and it will be fascinating to see if this succeeds in increasing their output and bolstering their independence.

At Wits Journalism, we have our own experiment: the Justice Project, funded by the Valley Trust and the Ford Foundation. They have given us money to work with students to investigate and expose cases of injustice. We will see if we can combine teaching, investigative journalism and human rights work.

These developments are changing the face of journalism. To be free of the traditional commercial media restraints on controversial and expensive investigations could provide a great boon to this work and to the promotion of an open society.

* This column was written for Beeld, 21 November 2009

Entry Filed under: Anton Harber, Journalism, Online