waffle

The Daily Show interviewed Jon Meacham on Wednesday, coincidentally the same day that Newsweek, the magazine he’s editing, went up for sale.

What’s been happening for the past few years that Jon (Meacham) and people inside his general industry are thinking about doesn’t have anything to do with journalism at all. It has to do with publishing, it has to do with (broadcast) programming, it has to do with prioritizing, it has to do with advertising, it has to do with opinions, it has to do with specialization, it has to do with endless chatter, but it hasn’t got anything to do with journalism.

Journalism is the concept of, process of and realization of an informative, accurate story. There are no bounds on objectiveness or subjectiveness. It doesn’t make any sense to talk about the type of website it shows up on, much as it doesn’t matter how wide the sheet of paper is that it is printed on. The story that broke the Watergate scandal could be written in a hurry on a roll of toilet paper and it’s still a piece of journalism. Great visualizations can be exemplary journalism.

Journalism doesn’t need to appear in its pure form. When people used to endlessly discuss whether “weblogs were journalism”, not only was that a weird thing because of the equating of a medium and instances of that medium with a form of work, but it was a ruthlessly inaccurate endeavor because they can be mixed. So called “opinion programming” can have tinges of journalism — it’s a way of saying “here’s what’s happening and here’s what I think about it”. This weblog is a big piece of opinion programming, which is also why TV shows where people debate weblogs not having merit has always struck me as lacking self-awareness.

Much like (and I hate myself for bringing this up because I’m sick of people talking about it) MTV is no longer much about Music, many traditional avenues for journalism have been edging it out with other forms of reporting. Having an opinion isn’t by itself journalism. It may, depending on your definition, make for terrific “news”, but it’s something else.

The Internet has meant a lot for journalism, because not every story is exactly equal. Many stories can be helped by perspectives or collaboration, and in those stories, the Internet can help. It has also meant a lot for publishing journalism. Unrelatedly, it has also meant a lot for publishing a bunch of other crap. That doesn’t mean that other crap is journalism.

Jon Meacham isn’t clinging to the past when it comes to knowing what Newsweek does better than many other popular outlets. There’s plenty of room to provide and produce many kinds of stories, and it’d be strange if something like Newsweek wasn’t especially good at producing a portion of them.

You know what one of my most used iPhone apps is? TextTV, named for the Swedish name for Teletext. I check the SVT feed a few times daily. It’s interesting what becomes of stories when they have to be brief and focused. Don’t let Twitter fool you into thinking restraints are something new.

The point I’m trying to make is that publishing and broadcasting has reduced journalism to one of several substances that are mixed together to form a gruel called “content”, to be “monetized”, to face the “barrage” from “new media”. Audience conditioning is an actual worry, but not a large one. Those that are having problems now are either running away from all of them, accepting a flawed narrative full of conflation and looking worried, or walking steadfastly into the future doing the same thing that they’ve always done.

The solution is very simple. Do what it is that you do very best; the thing that you would engrave on your tombstone as your proud contribution to society. Put it in a form that is the best and most convenient you can do for your audience given today’s technology. Abolish filler and bullshit. Leave behind, without mercy, any tradition that doesn’t also improve the quality of the journalism. Stand behind this entire product. I will guarantee you that people will appreciate and value your contribution and that means won’t be a problem.

It may be possible that the only way you can add any sort of value is for political ideology to shape every event that you report about or idea that you discuss, or for you to deliver Twitter stream or SMS recitals in high definition. In that case, I wish you luck and I hope you’re comfortable with the size of your audience.