Media4Diversity

The IFJ got involved in this study because it will help the media better understand what is going on in Europe. There is a lot of criticism of the media these days, but I think a lot has changed in recent years and we really want to get a fair evaluation of exactly what the situation is and this survey is absolutely essential to actually build an accurate picture of what the media situation is like.

Journalists and media managers are busy people. Why should they spare precious time completing a survey?

I know that they are really busy, so it's going to be really difficult. I know when a survey drops in my email, on my desk, I find it difficult to respond.  I would say  it is very important to fill in this survey, because it's a great opportunity to begin to showcase media work in this area.  I know that within journalism, there have been some really important initiatives taken, and that there is much more. I think, it is important that all media that has a story to tell on this should take a little time to fill in the survey  and make sure that what they are doing - their good practice - is top of the list when the study report  comes out.  This is going to be good publicity, good image making for them.  It is going to be good for every media that takes part in it. So, I really hope that people will give it the time.

What kinds of initiatives are you hoping to unearth via the study?

We are expecting to get initiatives that show that media are connected with their communities, that they are getting out and meeting with their communities, that they are developing new sources of information. They may be doing it to improve circulation or they may be doing it to improve their reach, or to try to get prizes. In aiming to reach their communities, they may be initiating actions with local schools, or taking action with the support of churches, or all sorts of different groups representing different cultural groups and so on. All these efforts demonstrate that media are better connected.  I would also like to find out how many media now are going out of their way to employ journalists coming from minorities, which is very, very important. Many of the changes that have taken place in recent years are direct result of the fact that in their employment policies editorial managers are looking for people that have experience of living in communities. This is going to be great, because it will reflect the changing demographic within media and journalism, and the more evidence we have of that the better it is going to be. So those are the two things - one is getting media out through their communities.  Two, how the media are using people and skills and talent from within those communities to do the journalistic job itself.

What kind of initiative is most likely to cut ice with journalists and editors?

I think the initiatives which actually make for better stories.  Journalists and editors are always going to be much more impressed with initiatives which are less about public relations and more about good journalism. Good stories.  I think we will find that the initiatives that are most popular and that work best are those which are really opening up new avenues, different ways of looking at things, different views about how the community is living. This isn't about creating worthy, well intentioned, feel-good journalism. That is not the point.  The real point is getting better journalism all around, so that in the picture we have all of the community represented, making sure we are getting the stories that don't normally get printed or broadcast.  So, the initiatives that deliver that sort of change that are going to impress editors and journalists.

How will the result of the survey be used by the IFJ's networks?

The survey will provide us with examples of good practice that we can use, that we will circulate to our people and say - look here are examples of things that work.  So we will be asking our unions, journalism associations, to take up the initiatives that we have identified in this process as being really useful.  So in that way, it's going to have a really multiplying effect - it's going to be about receiving the results of it and saying - that's good.  It is not an academic exercise - it's a union building exercise in good journalism and it's a confidence building exercise in good journalism because we will want to take the results and send them out to our network and try to get this replicated in other areas where it is not working at the moment.  And the more we do that - the better journalism there is going to be.

How much of good practice in this area may just boil down to a return to the basics of good journalism (accuracy, context, balance, etc)?

Inevitably that is the case because good journalism is always being connected, it's always about making sure you represent the whole community - not just the mainstream within the community, but the marginalised within the community. Actually, one of the problems we have in journalism is that, and we all know this, there are lots of cuts taking place, there's lots of cutting of corners in terms of the way we get news and the way we deliver news, and that has actually raised serious questions about the quality of journalism. So, when we get the results of this study and when we see how they being used, it seems to me, these will give us an idea of how good journalism can still be developed, even when there are hard times, even when it's difficult for the journalism business, even when there are cuts taking place - you can still have good inclusive diverse journalism.  So, from our point of view, it is going to be a great opportunity to deliver the evidence that we need to, sort of, turn our constant campaigning that media can do better into the reality of evidence that shows that it is actually doing better.

If this initiative is so important to the media, how come it has taken the impetus of the EC to get it under way?

One of the problems that we have is that resources are scarce.  If you look within media -  it's quite difficult to find the money to be spent on this sort of exercise.  You go to the average editor or editorial manager and say ‘Excuse me, can I have some money to carry out a survey about what is happening in a neighbouring country on a particular issue' - they will look at you and say ‘we have got greater priorities for how we spend our money'. It's been difficult to find money.  These are hard times for the media.  The European Commission has come along and is able to fund it - I think it is fine.  It is a matter of public interest and it is a good thing that public money can be used to find out what is going on in journalism and to improve quality of journalism.

What does success and impact look like for this study three years down the line?

It is always very difficult to predict that in 3 years things will be a lot better - I don't know whether it will be. I am not convinced that the crisis of funding within journalism is actually going to get easier.  I think things may get more difficult.  What I am convinced about is that good results from this survey should ensure us that there is an opportunity for media to try to maintain levels of quality of reporting. I would hope, in 2 or 3 years we will see those media that are committed to maintaining levels of quality, taking up all of the best practice suggestions that come from the survey. If we can see a growth in the number of media adopting the best practice as identified in this survey - then it will have been really successful,  because, you must remember,  this is a time when there is not much money around, and media are cutting back. But, if we can get more activity, more investment in this area, as far as media is concerned, I think, it will be a sign of its success.  So I cannot measure that and say ‘you know, we are going to see a 30 % or 50% growth in the use of best practices in this area', but,  if we get an increase, and I think the survey will deliver an increase, it will be a success.