To me it comes down to quality and authority. With such an array of information out there on the worldwide web, I assume that only the most important and well written news is actually published. My generation is no doubt both the most informed and least informed ever to lay eyes on a newspaper. A newspaper lays out all the news, whether relevant to me or not, and brings my attention to stories that would otherwise go un-clicked when I visit its homepage.

The large bold font screams out at me. I may not read past the headline, but at least I’m doing that. When multitasking on the web, as many of my friends do, I will only pay attention to what is of absolute importance to me. It is, in fact, all about me, when talking about online.

Perhaps that is why in previous weeks, my group focused its attention on the individual consumer when talking about the future of online news. Targeting specific audiences means that advertisers are kept happy – something that seems to be getting increasingly hard to do. It’d be silly to think that doing this would result in better journalism. If anything it would see real news and its marketability put to the ‘clicks test’; how many clicks are required to fund a serious news story?

I’m sure that news media organisations know the answer to this, but they’re keeping mum on the knowledge so that entertainment and lifestyle stories don’t take priority over what the news is supposed to be about.

What continues to surprise me is the lack of communication between news media organisations and today’s youth. The Sydney Morning Herald, for instance, offers a subscription for $30 for students, and every so often sends out a newsletter detailing odd pieces of information about its Education Program. The last promotion involved students with the subscription receiving movie tickets for every one of their friends they managed to convince to sign up for the year. I found the promotion rather odd. An online music or movie download would have made more sense, considering I know so few of my friends ever go to the cinemas anymore. It was as if SMH was trying to remind students of a time long ago, when people used to go to the cinemas to receive their weekly news updates. The gimmick certainly didn’t work on me.

Buying newspapers is a habit. For most it’s a public transport habit. Thousands of Sydney’s youth travel on public transport to get to school and university every day. I recall my first few years of high school. One bus, two trains and an hour and half later I was desperate for anything that wasn’t school related. If news media organisations had any sense they’d introduce cheaper newspaper subscriptions to students as young as Year 7. Year 7’s pay $10, Year 8’s $15 and so on, with a flat fee of $30 for Years 11 and 12. Not only would students then be reading the paper, but their families would too.

In these economic times, had it not been for my subscription, I can see no way I would be purchasing a newspaper every day. In the eyes of many newspapers have now become luxury items. In order for individuals to see them as necessities again, news media need to open up channels of communication between themselves and tomorrow’s buyers. It is no longer about now, it’s about the future. Finding out what future generations want from their news today would save vast amounts of time and money tomorrow, and it’d most definitely be easier than trying to figure out why youth like me, continue to buy newspapers. We’re still struggling with that question ourselves.

Tayissa Barone

The platform would also serve as a forum for debate and would incorporate many of the same features of a social networking site. Users would create profiles and could connect to other users in order to be updated on activities and political opinions or thoughts as issues unfold. Users would be able to create and upload their own multi-media packages (much like Youtube or a Blog) that could potentially be; news stories, opinion pieces, analysis, or social commentary. A grading system and a user identification method would ensure that gradually there is a self-maintaining system that filters through and ensures quality and preference. Guidelines and ‘how to’ videos would equip users with the know how in producing these packages.

Peter Kesina (CSU)

I would ask my reader to fill in a detailed survey about what they like to read, hear and see. The survey would get them to list all the topic areas they were interested in, as well as what their regular reading habits entailed. Did they check local news everyday but only check national and international daily? Were they more interested in news/lifestyle blogs than actual news stories? Did they check the news once a day, or every hour? I’d then ask them how they’d like the content presented, do they prefer video news stories over printed ones? Would they like all their news Twitter style in under 140 characters?
Then through some sort of computer program, I’d use that information and create a “my news” home page as an alternative to the ordinary home page allowing me to target relevant advertising towards my reader and give them the news they want without having to filter through everything else. The page would resemble the layout of say Facebook or Twitter depending on how the reader wished to have their content. A thread with all relevant news would include everything the reader wanted, as well as sidebar alternatives with topic areas that may not have been selected, so world news or sport for example.
These “my news” pages would be in addition to the ordinary home page and users would be able to change any of their responses in the survey at any time so the page could change as quickly as my readers interests.

Tayissa Barone (CSU)

I would establish a system that required readers to create a free profile. Users would need to provide basic information about themselves such as location, age and gender as well as specific interest areas such as politics, celebrity gossip, music, art and business. Members would be able to specify their interests even further, for example specifying a certain genre of music such as dance or punk, or specifying an area of politics such as state, federal or international. News articles would then be filtered to the member based on the information they have provided. These news articles would incorporate a range of media such as recorded interviews, video footage and links to further information on the subject. I would also include a service that uses a member’s geographic location to provide a link to a more locally based paper owned by ‘my’ corporation. These services would provide members with instant access to news they have an interest in and allow them expand their knowledge of subjects through added content and links. It would be a logical expansion of features such as “10 most popular news stories” already used by news websites.

Josh Manning (CSU)

WHEN

Over the last one hundred years interest in celebrities has risen. An increase in technology has led to celebrities becoming the victims of constant media attention. Our obsession with Hollywood scandal exploded with the proliferation of cable television broadcasts and other media which meant that celebrity and entertainment stories were pushing hard news stories off news broadcasts and the front pages of newspapers. Everyone agreed that entertainment and celebrity news should be reported but rarely did a celebrity story make front page. Now, however, it’s a different story everywhere we turn today there seems to be pictures or stories of celebrities. When we line up at the checkout to pay for groceries we are surrounded by Magazines carrying the latest story on the current ‘IT’ girl or guy or attempting to shock with the latest antics by Hollywoods troubled. Even when we open up the paper – both the daily paper and Sunday paper – there is a section dedicated to celebrity gossip. TV news bulletins contain celebrity gossip. We can’t even wake up in the morning and turn on the TV without hearing of Britney’s latest fall to rock bottom. Although there isn’t an exact date and time when celebrity news stories became so popular many people believe that the O.J Simpson murder scandal during the mid 1990’s saw the turning point in the public’s attitude to news coverage.

WHY

Could it be that journalists are becoming too lazy? Some of the best stories require persistence and a lot of effort to uncover. Are freedom of information laws too strict that journalist don’t have the money or resources to access certain information? Or is it just a simple matter of popularity?

We decided to ask people if they would prefer a celebrity story to a hard news story and 86% said celebrity news stories interest them more than serious news stories. With the majority of consumers wanting to know the latest celebrity gossip it seems only natural that media organisations will provide them with it. This will lead to larger sales and higher ratings which will result in more advertising revenue. There is a lot of money to be made out of celebrity and entertainment news. If you get the exclusive coverage of an awards ceremony or the only interview with a fresh out of jail Paris Hilton. As we said in a previous post, it’s no secret that the media is a profitable organisation that needs to make money to survive. Although many would agree that journalistic values should not be sacrificed for economic reward.

WHAT DOES IT MEAN

The much-sought-after younger generation has a never-ending need for juicy celebrity news and media organisations are more than happy to give it to them, no matter how low they have to go to get it. Sex, nudity and exposes of the private lives of people have replaced news and information in the popular press. It seems nowadays more often than not a story on a celebrity will be chosen over a hard hitting news story. Instead of journalists pursuing hard news stories their time is spent chasing rumours about celebrities.

Thank you for your time and feel free to comment on our blog or leave suggestions for ideas. We will be continuing our blog when we return to on-campus studies in early May.

Erin Somerville

Elyce Kolder

Caterina Fraga Matos

Stephanie Borys

Natalie Whiting

Natalie Howarth

When you ask students why they don’t buy newspapers, watch television news or tune into radio news their excuses will all lead in a similar direction: Time.

Generation Y have all the immediacy of an emergency news bulletin with none of the substance.

When your day to day existence is made up of instant messaging and live feed, it’s no wonder our generation think they are too busy and important to inform themselves of the outside world. They have been taught by adoring, pampering parents and over-paid teachers that their world is the most important.

Generation Y have grown up in an environment that panders to their every need. They can get almost anything they want when they want it, and this is just as true of communication mediums. Theirs is literally a world of choice. Funnily enough, the generation who live in a world which has become a smaller place because of communication, is only interested in their tiny microcosm. If something doesn’t affect a Gen Y they can’t see the importance of knowing about it. Facebook and Twitter are clear testiment to this.

Although there are the odd class full of communication students who feel the need to keep up to date with news and current affairs, this minority are not going to keep an entire diverse industry alive.

It all boils down to one thing. Generation Y is simply too lazy.

The excuse of “I’m simply too busy” is just that. An excuse. If they find time to check their Facebook thirty times a day, they can certainly check the news online. But if it came down to a power battle between the Sydney Morning Herald online and Facebook, the latter would certainly win.

The problem of decline in media consumption has been debated by many journalism students. The format of a newspaper has been called outdated and cumbersome, the television news restrictive, and online platforms accused of being daunting and badly researched. But the problem is less about news media and more about Gen Y’s favourite topic: US.

The battle that news media is losing is not one of content but care factor. And currently gen Y’s is almost zero. Perhaps, then, it shouldn’t be a battle, but a compromise. It would be impossible to convince an adolescent that “real news” is more important than the student microcosm. However, an obvious old adage comes to mind.

If Mohammed won’t come to the mountain…

If students are too lazy to access the media that is so readily at their fingertips, why not seek out the places they are frequenting.

If The Australian online had a Facebook group that posted live news updates on my homepage and during the thirty times a day I checked it something interested me, I would certainly click a link to their site. This way, I get the most essential information, I do even less work and the news media site gets more hits. Everybody wins.

All without me ever knowing I left the microcosm.

And this way we can all stop pretending we’re time poor.

Contributed by Courtney Colborne, Shannon Cuthbert, Emily Boyle, Peter Kesina, Tayissa Barone, Elizabeth Grant

EXHAUSTION OF NEWS:

When we read over the surveys we found most people commented that they wanted new news; they were sick of the media hanging onto a story for more than a couple of days. When a big story breaks, it is only natural that the public will want full and detailed coverage, and it is inevitable that the media will give the public what they want, but the question needs to be asked: how much is too much?

A prime example of running a story to the point of exhaustion is the Beaconsfield mining disaster. When Todd Russell and Brant Webb were discovered alive, journalists flocked to the small town. The media sensed the massive rating potential and created a minute-by-minute report on the smallest details that occurred at Beaconsfield. Much of what occurred at the Beaconsfield disaster is applicable to the recent coverage of the Victorian bushfires. The problem with running a story for over a week or more is that the audience becomes desensitised to the event, which is especially sad when the news relates to a tragedy such as these. News organisations were having a field day, squeezing every possible angle out of these stories they could, packaging it into a ‘feel good’ article or story of despair. These events were over run. Yes, we want to hear about them but to be told basically the same thing one day after the next gets tiring. We want to hear about new stories and a variety of them.

This poses the question, if the public become sick of a story they will stop watching the news/buying the papers therefore media outlets lose numbers, is this not the worst result any media empire could dream of? What makes these media outlets risk their ratings to continue following a story? And when do they decide enough is enough?

SENSATIONALISM:

The exhaustion of news stories can run hand in hand with the sensationalism of news. In order to keep the public interested media outlets intensify the story. It’s no secret that the media is a profitable organisation; while they have a responsibility to keep the public informed it is a business that needs to make money to survive.

During the Beaconsfield disaster journalists would ruthlessly hunt down emotionally distraught relatives and friends for a chance at that one sensational scoop. This led to the disaster not only being about the trapped miners, but the public questioning the morals and principles of journalists. No matter how much we criticised, the media had created a story that had become addictive. The media made us feel as if it were our brother, our uncle or our father down the mineshaft. They did this through extensive profiles on the two men and their families and never-ending interviews with the locals. It was a technique that engaged the audience, and this engagement inevitably led to higher ratings. According to the media blogs and opinion polls at the time, the media was wearing thin on the Australian public. Beaconsfield is a prime example of how journalists are not just reporters, but marketers and business people.

Not only does sensationalism happen in major disasters but also in everyday news.  Tabloid papers are full of sensationalism. They contain lots of pictures, simple stories, gossip and are cheaper to make. When we conducted our survey we found over half complained about the large amount of celebrity gossip. They were keen to hear about stories affecting the nation and the world, not about Paris’ latest scandal. Yes, there is no denying that the celebrity cult has millions of people hooked but there is a time and place for it. Sensationalising news stories gets on people’s nerves, they just want to hear the story for how it is and if it isn’t interesting enough with pure facts then the question arises, should it be in the news at all?

QUALITY VS. QUANTITY

The fast pace of today’s society has caused us to trade in quality for quantity. We do with food, shopping and even our relationships, as seen through the social media trends. And now it is evident that we are sacrificing the quality of our news.  The need to juggle multiple tasks throughout the day has caused the public to become less patient and consequently the demand for in-depth, informative material has virtually ceased. Instead, the public are wanting as much as they can get in the littlest amount of time possible, hence the slow and painful death of quality news. Fast disappearing are the days where journalists would spend hours of their time providing in-depth, breaking, investigatory reports for the public. Now it has become a race to break the story, regardless of how little information the journalist has or how verified it is. Without quality is there any point to news?

EVALUATING NEWS VALUES:

As journalism students one of the first things we learn about are news values. However looking at some of the news that is reported, many of them don’t seem to be followed. Competition between media outlets seems to be the number one priority news value, even before looking at the reasons for choosing a story. If the other channel/paper is running a story more often than not the other media outlet will report on the same event, without even considering news values. Everyone seems so wrapped in beating everyone else that nothing else matters.

Many respondents to our survey said they were sick of soft news. While news associations may be skirting around the heavy issues that we are facing at the moment to keep the public happy, they must be reminded that this is not their job. News media is NOT a form of escapism.

Thanks for your time and let us know what you think about these issues and any other areas you would like us to discuss.

Caterina Fraga Matos

Erin Somerville

Stephanie Borys

Natalie Whiting

Elyce Kolder

Natalie Howarth 

We asked the following questions:

*How many times a day do you access media?

*How much of your media consumption is news or current affairs?

*Do you read the newspaper, if not then why?

*When you are consuming media is it your focus or is it in the background?

*What’s your preferred media to get news and why?

*What would encourage you to consume more news media and why?

*Do you have any criticisms of the news?

Here are our findings.

Preferred news medium

Half of the people surveyed (50%) preferred television as their medium to access news. Respondents generally preferred this medium due its accessibility, convenience, and flexibility and low level of intrusiveness into the respondents’ lifestyle. As one respondent answered, “Television – it is just so easy. I can use it in a passive way, it is in the background and it is easy. I don’t have to log onto the net, or go downtown to buy a paper, it just comes to me as part of my routine.” Since television is a hot medium, it leaves little need for the viewer to interpret and interact with the material, as opposed to newspapers and the Internet. One respondent preferred television as they found that format was the easiest way for them to understand the news. As society continues to speed up and people cram more activities into their day, it is apparent that being spoon fed the news is becoming increasingly popular as people run out of time to sift through the facts and interpret the news for themselves.

Following television as preferred medium to receive the news was the internet, with 22% of respondents preferring this medium. Convenience again was the main reason people preferred the internet in accessing their news, and many of the respondents presented arguments into why it is even more convenient than television. Unlike television, respondents claimed that news on the internet was “always there when I want,” and they liked that it was continuously updated, rather than having to wait for the next television or radio bulletin, or an entire day for the newspaper. While respondents admitted that the internet was more intrusive than television and couldn’t be used as background media, they still found it a more convenient medium due to the amount of time they are already spending on the internet. Another reason they preferred news on the internet was the ability to tailor the news to their needs and wants. “It is there when I want and I can go straight to the section that I am interested in”, said one.

Closely following online news were traditional newspapers, with 19% of preferences. Most significantly, however, was that whilst this group identified newspapers as their preferred news medium, many did not always read the paper. For these students it was ultimately a matter of cost and convenience issues arising from different living situations that impacted on their newspaper reading: whilst at home the paper is delivered to their doorstep and paid for by their parents, at university it has to be picked up from the shop and paid for out of their own pocket.   

Of the 32 respondents, only one person preferred the radio.

With convenience being the main factor behind preferred media, the question must be asked, are the public sacrificing quality for quantity and accessibility?

More media?

Of the 32 respondents, 25% said that they already believed they consumed enough media. “I believe that it is all about personal interest and you can’t really force more news coverage upon people,” said one.

An overwhelming majority of people’s answers also related specifically to accessibility and cost. Many people for example said that free newspapers or having better access to broadband would certainly encourage more news consumption. Other suggestions related more to content. These included specialising in certain news areas, exploring new ways to present the news, removing soft stories and decreasing short content and editorialising.

Some people also noted that they would like to consume more media, but identified time as a major factor preventing them from consuming the amount of news they desire. With people juggling more tasks in the day, these respondents said they preferred to consume media which required little focus and enabled them to multi-task, e.g listening to a news bulletin on the radio while driving, quickly watching a short news bulletin, or having a news media window on the internet to flick between.

Interestingly, four respondents said that nothing would encourage them to consume more news because they simply weren’t interested. This is indicative of sectors in society both in our age group and perhaps in society as a general, to whom news media is simply not a concern.

Critiquing the news

Of the 32 people interviewed, 25% said that they found the news consisted mostly of unworthy and irrelevant news, described by one person as “sappy crap and bullshit stories”. In the words of another, “A lot of the TV news is bullshit. Once you reach 7.06pm you start getting stories about how Daffy Duck is alive again. This is not news. It isn’t news that people should care about: you watch the news to be educated, to be find out about the world, not that Pamela Anderson fell downstairs.”

Furthermore, many people said the underlying business model of news organisations impeded their efficacy and credibility. One respondent came to the conclusion that “selling and making a profit is all that seems to matter. I get the impression that both TV and newspapers are just filled with crap to meet the quota.”

A further 22% of respondents said that they found the news too negative. They said that after viewing the news they were left feeling slightly helpless, sad and anxious over the state of the affairs in the world. For example, when asked why he didn’t read more news, one respondent answered simply: “I like not being depressed.”

Sensationalism, repetition and exhausting angles were also listed as some of the major issues that people had with today’s news. “The overload of big stories to death is becoming more and more common,” said one. “They exhaust every possible angle, play on the sensationalism to the point where the public can become apathetic.” Examples provided included the recent Victorian bushfires, Beaconsfield and September 11.

However, not all people were critical. Four respondents said they had no criticism of today’s news styles and one said that it was “well done. It is informative and has enough entertainment.”

Consumption levels, focus and new media demands.

Ultimately what this survey highlights is that the media consumption of today’s youth (here defined as 18-22 year olds), is incredibly high. Respondents interact with some form of media an average of 8 times a day, (with some people indicating usage of up to 25 times a day) over a period of an average of 5 hours per day (with some people devoting up to 9 hours per day). At first this clearly depicts the highly media saturated society that we form a part of. Significantly, however, of this time, an average of 25% (or an average of 2 hours) of media consumption is news or current affairs related. Furthermore, what is significant is that 72% of people stated that when consuming their news media it was their focus and not a background activity.

Given this all this information, what this indicates to us is that today’s youth is prepared to devote time to news media given first and foremost that it holds their interest, secondly, that it isn’t costly and thirdly that it doesn’t interrupt their regular daily patterns. The future of news, therefore, lies in devising ways which both initially capture this sector’s attention and then retain it through content, form and increasing of modes interactivity. 

Caterina Fraga Matos

Erin Somerville

Stephanie Borys

Natalie Whiting

 Elyce Kolder

 Natalie Howarth

The motivation behind ‘old school’ forms of communication, such as letter writing, has changed and generation Y see putting pen to paper as a novelty for every now and then. The last time I wrote a letter was around Christmas time, but before that I had probably had at least two overdue dentist visits before having posted mail in a physical form. One student said she stopped writing letters over two years ago because it was too much hassle and her pen pal wouldn’t go online. Online services have rendered letters obsolete as a means of communication. Although letters have a more personal feel, online servers such and text messaging facilitate almost immediate gratification in terms of communication and makes sending a letter seems like a pointless exercise.

Phone calls are increasingly seen as archaic among generation Y. The majority of us admit we are more likely to text than call, thanks to its ease and relative cheapness. Phone calls are something we identify with family, only coming into play for the standard Sunday evening phone call from mum. Generally speaking, we are unlikely to call anyone unless there is a pressing reason, which cannot be covered in 150 text characters.

Surprisingly, some students manage to get by without a mobile phone. However for those who do survive outside of the world of SMS, social networking sites are cited as their major form of communication. As students we tend to check our email and Facebook compulsively. Some admit to logging on up to ten or more times a day for fear of being “out of the loop.” For many of us, Facebook goes hand and hand with assignments as we sit at our laptops. Facebook itself has essentially become a news source, it provides instant and updated information on who’s broken up with whom, who is going out tonight, what happened at that party. For generation Y, Facebook generated news is at least on par with the need to know current affairs.

Facebook is even used to create groups, which enables youth based bodies to make their opinions heard. Traditional campaign strategies, such as petitions, are overlooked as Facebook groups have a more significant impact and gain greater reach. Just recently, a group was formed by students at Charles Sturt University to challenge the university’s decision to cut a communication tutor’s hours from full to part time and Facebook enabled our protest to be quantified and easily transmitted on our behalf.

However the instantaneous nature of new communication forms has impacted the social attitudes and expectations of generation Y. While new technologies have made keeping in touch easier, the fast transmission of messages through websites such as Facebook, have enhanced the pressure to be constantly social.  Some of us feel we can’t keep up with the flurry of messages, many of them pointless, and become overwhelmed by the fact this could have adverse effects on our relationship with the sender. However these ‘facebook flaws’ tend to be overlooked because the server is so time convenient and has such a strong reach.  We can reply and engage with people when it suits us, with little hassle. Most friends and acquaintances utilise the benefits of facebook meaning there is no need to use other means of communication.

Compiled by  Elizabeth Grant, Tayissa Barone, Emily Boyle, Courtney Colborne, Shannon Cuthbert and Peter Kesina. 

Not so Twitastic, after all

By Vanessa Lawrence

Facebook and I have been going steady for two years, now. I think it’s getting serious. After all, what more could you ask for in a partner? He’s always there for me when I need him and he never talks back. Perfection.

But I have a confession: lately, I’ve had thoughts about someone else…Twitter, the latest form of social networking. I knew it was wrong but I couldn’t help it. I’m what one would call a ‘techno-junkie’ and, after staying faithful to Facebook as my only form of social networking for so long, I started to get restless. Was it possible something even more fulfilling was out there?

I wasn’t ready to throw away my history with Facebook until I knew all the facts about Twitter. As it turns out, this wasn’t hard to do. In case you haven’t noticed, people have been going a little crazy over it lately (whatever happened to loyalty). Its current membership stands at 6 million – a figure that continues to climb every day.

Basically, you sign up for free on the website (www.twitter.com) and then you write about whatever you’re doing in what’s known as a Tweet. No matter how banal the details of your life may seem, you can share it on Twitter. And people certainly do [Katie Adams: is ironing her work skirt and putting on her makeup for the day]. Newsworthy? More like snooze-worthy.

In all fairness, you only have 140 characters to work with (it seems Twitter isn’t as tolerant of verbosity as Facebook). It’s hard to write anything overly profound or interesting in just a few short sentences. But when (or if) you come across someone you find interesting enough, you can choose to ‘follow them’ and have their updates sent directly to your homepage. This way, you can ensure you don’t miss a Tweet.

None of this sounded appealing to me and the more I learnt about Twitter, the more I began to resent people who compared it to my true love, Facebook. They’re nothing alike: Facebook encourages actual social interaction, whereby your friends and family can write messages on your wall and you on theirs. You can join groups, browse endless amounts of photos and videos and share detailed information about your interests and personality. Twitter offers none of this, save for the status update part.

I can see why it might be an appealing concept to others. It’s quick, easy and the most uncomplicated form of social media on offer at the moment. Even celebs are hopping on the bandwagon [Ashton Kutcher: just made a pizza with Demi]. As much as I’m tempted to branch out, I’ve decided the whole thing is just not for me. Quite frankly, I’m a little relieved. I don’t need another incentive to waste away hours a day.

Facebook cares about my needs in a way Twitter never could and I hereby vow never to be tempted by another social networking site again. After all, there are enough as it is. Facebook, MySpace, YouTube, flickr…there are so many different options. Do we really need another?

Sorry Twitter, I’m just not that into you.

The Form Guide’s Age of Enlightenment

By Trent Hile

As an avid racing fan without too many inside contacts, I fit into a category widely epitomised by the majority of the Australian racing public – your typical mug punter.

The tool of your average racing tragic is the form guide.

For decades, punters in Australia have turned to their Saturday paper in the hope of spotting a run which will turn their hard-earned into an attractive collect later that afternoon.

But why are we relegated to such archaic means of race-day preparation?

Racing is Australia’s fourth largest industry, catering for people at all levels of the socio-economic scale.

In recent times, the Australian Jockey Club has attempted to capture a younger crowd through innovations such as “Sunset Racing”, increasing the excitement of the racing experience and giving the sport’s image a facelift.

Keeping this in mind, as well as the ever-expanding nature of technology, it recently occurred to me: why not upgrade the race form guide?

Just as letters have shifted to emails, why not utilise technology to create an interactive form guide, where each week punters can view video footage of the last runs of their horse, rather than just read a brief description?

I believe there is a viable market for media outlets offering a members-only online form guide service, which groups video footage of past runs and barrier trials.

The service could also offer other features, including speed maps, ratings of how each horse performs in prevailing track conditions, and market assessments.

By utilising technology, media outlets could not only compete with existing racing websites, but capture a younger, more technology-savvy audience.

If newspapers are indeed facing extinction, let’s take the next step by putting a foot in the door of the future, by providing a new and more sophisticated service for the everyday punter.

Something To Be Desired

By Dane Halpin

A common concern of anybody who is dealing with the press today is how their story is going to be portrayed.

Journalists, and the media in general, tend to have a fairly poor reputation for imbuing truth with some form of sensationalism, often at the cost of factual accuracy – so much so that journalists are rated in the top ten least trusted professions according to a Reader’s Digest poll.

So it was perhaps no surprise to see Gerry McCann, the father of missing British toddler Madeline McCann, recently vent his anger over the handling of his family’s case by the mainstream press, explicitly Express Newspapers.

He told the Commons Culture, Media and Sport Committee, looking into press standards, “Our family has been the focus of some of the most sensational, untruthful, irresponsible and damaging reporting in the history of the press,”

It’s difficult for us to know the full extent of this given that he is referring to press coverage in Britain, though the media circus that surrounded the McCann case was well documented here in Australia as well, so we did gain some appreciation.

Regardless, it’s a universal theme that Mr McCann is raising.

Why is it that the media have to exploit people’s misery and why is the subsequent depiction of this misery so profitable?

Now I’m not for a minute trying to suggest that this case should not have been in the news, as it does have high news values. The way that the media behaved, though, left something to be desired.

After all, take a few cute photos, a shocking ’snatched from her bed’ plot-line and two humble, loving parents in grief and you have the recipe for a media orgy, all falling over each other to catch on to what little information can be garnered from this event.

One can only imagine how it must feel to be the continual source of ostracism and subsequent vindication of the mainstream media as her parents invariably were.

The behaviour of the media in this case was insensitive and ultimately unproductive, and in the end perhaps the biggest travesty in this whole saga is the missed opportunity.

The media had a chance to act as a useful tool in the search for a missing child. They had the power to act as an intermediary between police, the family, and members of the general public, and yet this power was manipulated for the sake of sales.

Perhaps Mr McCann’s words sum up the best: “there has to be some degree of control, I believe, or deterrent to publishing untrue and particularly damaging stories where they have the potential to ruin people’s lives.”

Brave New World

By Nick Eggert

“We are people of this generation, bred in at least modest comfort, housed now in universities, looking uncomfortably to the world we inherit…”

                                                                      Tom Hayden, Field Secretary of Students for a Democratic Society, 1962.

These words were written over 20 years before I was born, and yet there is a ring of truth to them that holds as much for Gen-Yers as it did for the Baby Boomers – particularly in reference to our industry.

There is no doubt, we are trying to move into a workforce where latest job figures predict unemployment could be as high as 7.5% next year, in an already shrinking job market for our industry. The global economic downturn is forcing people to put off their retirement plans for years to come, in order to sure-up their superannuation.

It seems to me, “looking uncomfortably” at what we are to inherit is somewhat of an understatement.

Mark Hollands’ latest posting in ‘The C.E.O. View’ is a great article looking at the disparate approaches to the newspaper industry of US President, Barrack Obama, and French President, Nicolas Sarkozy, but more importantly (to those of us in the domestic industry, at least), also touching on the question of Australia’s stance on this issue.

I won’t go into the details of the article, but it does raise some pertinent questions, both for myself and our industry at large:

Will Kevin Rudd attempt to circumvent traditional media to reach his audience? He already has a very active Twitter account.

Or will he follow in President Sarkozy’s footsteps by making traditional media readily available to the younger generation?

Is a traditionalist approach the right solution? President Sarkozy has issued a one-year newspaper subscription to all French teenagers upon turning 18, but how many will continue those subscriptions once they are no longer free?

More generally, have we lost sight of the importance of a free press, and what will it take to be reminded of its necessity?

These are the questions that plague, certainly my mind, and very likely the majority of my colleagues’.

If this blog is designed to give industry members an insight into the next generation of journalists, perhaps these are the questions that need to be answered before mutual understanding can be reached.

 reports on their media consumption habits.

Please respond with specific questions/issues

you would like them to address.

Our consumption of the media.

If our consumption of the media is anything to go by, newspapers in their current form will be dead before tomorrow’s 9am bulletin. Instead their online website supplements will take over and become news media agencies’ primary source of income.

As a generation who barely remembers not having a computer in the home, online media has surpassed newspapers in providing an in depth analysis of local, national and international news. As journalism students, we recognise that a newspaper will provide us with a much clearer overview of yesterday’s news than simply scanning a news website’s online page. However the ease, convenience and cost of reading the news online has meant that hassle of reading the newspaper is only forgotten on weekends.

The Weekend Australian’s recent rise in sales might be our strongest piece of evidence that the time consuming nature of sitting down to read tiny print, and risk bumping someone when you turn the pages has seen newspapers relegated to the weekend morning breakfast. One of the points almost every member of our group mentioned was the convenience associated with online news. Despite having newspaper subscriptions, simply going to our university store to collect them has become too much effort. Why even bother getting the subscription in the first place if everything that is in the newspaper gets published online and can be accessed for free. That sentiment, while important with struggling students, appears to now fall in line with the mainstream. Everyone wants up to the second news, on demand, when it suits them. In some ways it’s possible to suggest that online news allows us to be better informed about certain issues than reading a newspaper because at least with online we might actually bother.

Our group discussed the issue of timetables and schedules that inhibit us from sitting down to watch a half hour television broadcast, in the same way sitting down to read the paper was too much hassle. Having said that it is important to note that everyone in our group mentioned that they enjoy listening to either ABC Radio National or a local radio station to keep up to date with the news. The immediacy of radio, something that also appeals to us in online, means that a five to ten minute news bulletin keeps us up to date without much effort on our behalf. The conversational tone of the newsreaders keeps us interested and engaged and in the case of Radio National, we’re not having to listen to trivial entertainment news about who Britney is dating at the moment.  When it comes to local news in the Central West we prefer radio to television, with newspapers not even rating a mention, primarily due to their price.

Two other issues popped up at our meetings. The first was that online sites often published stories produced by AAP as breaking news and it wasn’t until hours later did they have their own angle or even rewrite of the story. This aspect leads most of us to check different online sources. It certainly could be argued cross-referencing stories is something only done by journalism students, but with it being so easy to simply google news an issue, who knows how many people are doing it. The second issue was that we would often find ourselves watching or reading news produced by international news channels, such as the BBC, instead of going to local news organisations first. With fewer and fewer foreign correspondents writing for Australian news agencies, students are turning their attention to online sites whose reporting and analysis of international news is in no way comparable to what is offered at home.

We see the future in online, but we still do believe there’s a big future for radio. However, newspapers who don’t invest in strengthening their online capabilities will just fall behind the news agencies who provide their breaking news.

Compiled by Tayissa Barone, Emily Boyle, Courtney Colborne, Shannon Cuthbert, Elizabeth Grant and Peter Kesina.