These are the most troubling times in recollection for the media business – and thus for you, sorry to say.
Few want to hear that. Many see media as something that belongs to others than themselves, reflecting others than themselves. They may not see their well-being associated with media well-being.
That mirror is shattered, as we know.
Each technological advance further destabilizes the economic model for journalism, atomizing advertising and dispersing the connection of creator and consumer. Last week’s cuts at Bell Media and Maclean’s and buyouts of 26 journalists at the Vancouver Sun and Province are routine news about news these days.
The complacency and defensiveness in the industry about the need for systemic change to better reflect and serve interests have contributed to low public trust in many media, particularly newer sources.
And now the world’s most powerful person is piling on, nursing daily doubts in his base of support and emboldening forces that distort and denigrate facts. He may help traditional, responsible journalism resurge, but there are bound to be reckless, dispiriting, combative episodes along the way.
If you are still reading at this point, then you will recognize the importance of media to democracy, to the strengthening of communities, and to our personal and professional identities.
In recent days a report commissioned by the federal government and conducted by the Public Policy Forum think-tank attempted to tackle some of the economic ailments in the belief that government intervention will produce a better service to the public. The general thrust: the tax system is inequitable, the digital companies are not paying their fair shares, philanthropy is insufficiently encouraged and the Canadian Broadcasting Corp. needs to lean into news and get out of digital advertising.
Money needs to be found and reallocated.
The boldest recommendation of The Shattered Mirror report is a withholding tax on Internet companies that aren’t directly in the news business (read: Google, Facebook, Twitter) but earn advertising revenue by carrying content. This would today generate roughly $400 million, an amount that is bound to increase.
This would create a fund for digitally innovative, indigenous and civic-minded journalism, an open-source local news organization and a service to legally advise smaller outfits that engage in investigative and accountability work. It is similar in nature to a cable/satellite provider tax that funds television and film, and its direct application would presumably make it more independent of government involvement.
But research analysis released last week following the report suggests tepid support for government assistance. Mind you, the context was different: polling was conducted in October, before Donald Trump was defining his presidency and before we were much discussing the proliferation of “fake news” online to distort and persuade.
That being said, the polling indicates public concerns that government assistance might influence fair-minded and fearless journalism. In other words, the very principles that people like about media – their independent efforts to hold power accountable – would be compromised by government support.
Sheesh. You can’t win.
Which creates a policy dilemma for our federal government.
In general, with some exceptions, the prime minister has expressed genuine concern about the economic woes of the press. But if the public would not embrace government helping the press, it is hard to believe he would embrace it.
An early test of resolve will be this spring’s federal budget, because many of the report’s less spectacular recommended tax provisions are low-hanging fruit to pick. The fight to pick with Facebook, Google et al. is quite another matter.
What Justin Trudeau would know is what the report says we should know: the status quo is not a healthy option for all of us. Through some fault of their own, but mainly the fault of market forces and technology, the media need medication.
Kirk LaPointe is Business in Vancouver’s vice-president of audience and business development.
