That’s among the take-aways from the 2012 State of the News Media report, released today by the Pew Research Center’s Project for Excellence in Journalism. The news industry, the report says, “finds itself more a follower than leader shaping its business.”

The Project for Excellence in Journalism (PEJ) report points out that even though targeted advertising is one of the forms of online advertising expected to grow most rapidly, only a few of the top news sites use it. Meanwhile, the report says, tech companies like Facebook and Google “are using personal data collected over the internet to direct ads to specific consumers to a far greater degree than ever before – and to a far greater degree than most news organizations are capable of.”

The annual survey by Pew points out that mainstream news organizations could catch up, if they try. Most have the ability but are not yet utilizing their resources at hand.

Only three – CNN, The New York Times and Yahoo! News – employed high levels of targeting based on a user’s recent online activity. While targeted display ads account for just 10% of local online ads, or $1.5 billion, right now, by 2016, they are expected to grow to $14.6 billion and make up more than half the market.

Mainstream media up for sale?

A year ago, the Pew State of the News Media reported: “The news industry, late to adapt and culturally more tied to content creation than engineering, finds itself more a follower than leader shaping its business.” In 2012, that phenomenon has grown.

All this raises the question of whether the technology giants will find it in their interest to acquire major legacy news brands — as part of the “everything” they offer consumers. Does there come a point, to ensure the much smaller media company’s survival, for instance, where Facebook considers buying a legacy media partner such as The Washington Post?

There are already signs of closer financial ties between technology giants and news. As a part of YouTube’s plans to become a producer of original television content, a direction it took strongly last year, it is funding Reuters to produce original news shows. Yahoo recently signed a content partnership with ABC News for the network to be its near sole provider of news video. AOL, after seeing less than stellar success with its attempts to produce its own original content, purchased The Huffington Post. With the launch of its Social Reader, Facebook has created partnerships with The Washington Post, The Wall Street Journal, The Guardian and others. In March 2012 Facebook co-founder Chris Hughes purchased the 98-year-old New Republic magazine.

Read the complete report … click here.

Anti-health care protest on Capitol Hill, November 2009. Photo by Jose Luis, AP.

The media was there, too, to capture the demonstration theatre … TV cameras rolling on the shouting wackos, many of them holding professionally printed signs. But, no reporter bothered to do any basic journalism to find out who has been behind the protestors.

Isn’t anyone else curious besides me? Who has organized the protestors for these months of demonstrations in Washington? Who paid for them to get to Washington? Who paid for their meals and lodging? Did anyone give them some walking around money to be there? What do the protestors do for a living? Or, are they professional protestors? It’s easy stuff to find out, and all it takes it being curious … because a bigger story is often in learning who’s behind such a completely screwball series of performances for such a long time.

But … today’s media is not curious. They don’t ask questions. Heck, much of the time they just interview each other, as if any of them knew anything.

It’s no surprise that there has been a proliferation of front organizations spring up in Washington, all with warm and fuzzy names, like “Ordinary Citizens Just Trying to Earn an Honest Buck” or the “American Alliance for Pure Water and Clear Skies.” I made up those names, of course, because I don’t wish to be sued. But such outfits are often backed by deep pockets with evil intent.

I guess I need to ask this question to the so-called reporters of today … aren’t you afraid of acting like second lieutenants to the devil by not asking questions and becoming, by default, accomplices?

Television news today – local, cable or national – is all formula driven. There are a few exceptions, like PBS NewsHour and HD Net’s World Report, but just a few. The rest of it is mostly shallow, inane and predictable.

Nobody has explored the anatomy of how to report TV news better than Charlie Brooker in London:

Neda has become a much larger symbol for freedom, in Iran and around the world – an innocent person caught between a crumbling government led by religious extremists and ever-growing protests by throngs of people demanding an end to tyranny.

“Even if a bullet goes through my heart it’s not important,” she told Caspian Makan, her fiancé. “What we’re fighting for is more important. When it comes to taking our stolen rights back we should not hesitate. Everyone is responsible. Each person leaves a footprint in this world.”

In naming her Person of the Year, the Times of London wrote:

It was not hard to see why Ms Soltan so quickly became the face of the opposition, the Iranian equivalent of the young man who confronted China’s tanks during the Tiananmen Square demonstrations 20 years earlier. She was young and pretty, innocent, brave and modern. She wore make-up beneath her mandatory headscarf, jeans and trainers beneath her long, black coat, and liked to travel. She transcended the narrow confines of religion, nationality and ideology. She evoked almost universal empathy.

As the new year approaches, the so-called Green Movement appears to be gaining confidence and momentum. It no longer seems impossible that the regime could fall in 2010. If and when it does, Ms Soltan will be remembered as the pre-eminent martyr of the second Iranian revolution.

Neda has left a gentle footprint on the world …

The NewsHour's "retired" logo

The NewsHour with Jim Lehrer on PBS Television – one of the most respected daily news programs in television history – will have a high tech facelift this coming Monday. Everything I’ve seen that they are doing is spectacular. The updates will make the best even better, in my opinion.

Not only will NewsHour continue its legacy and reputation for superb coverage of major stories, everything on the air will be mirrored and expanded online in ways the other TV news programs never dreamed of.

In announcing the changes, the program’s host, Jim Lehrer, took a moment to underscore his rules of journalist that act as a beacon for excellence at his program. I’m very proud to share his remarks here:

I practice journalism in accordance with the following guidelines:

• Do nothing I cannot defend.
• Do not distort, lie, slant or hype.
• Do not falsify facts or make up quotes.
• Cover, write and present every story with the care I would want if the story were about me.
• Assume there is at least one other side or version to every story.
• Assume the viewer is as smart and caring and good a person as I am.
• Assume the same about all people on whom I report.
• Assume everyone is innocent until proven guilty.
• Assume personal lives are a private matter until a legitimate turn in the story mandates otherwise.


Jim Lehrer

• Carefully separate opinion and analysis from straight news stories and clearly label it as such.
• Do not use anonymous sources or blind quotes except on rare and monumental occasions. No one should ever be allowed to attack another anonymously.
• Do not broadcast profanity or the end result of violence unless it is an integral and necessary part of the story and/or crucial to its understanding.
• Acknowledge that objectivity may be impossible but fairness never is.
• Journalists who are reckless with facts and reputations should be disciplined by their employers.
• My viewers have a right to know what principles guide my work and the process I use in their practice.
• I am not in the entertainment business.

~ Jim Lehrer

While, on one hand, a spokesperson for GlobalPost responded in a curiously confrontational manner – especially for a fairly new “news” organization – I just received far more professional and enlightening perspective from Newshour about their program changes (what do you expect?)

• Will Newshour’s long-time relationship with London-based ITN change? The answer is No.
• Why make this change? Newshour says:

“It is just one way we are expanding our international coverage. Far from outsourcing, Margaret Warner and Ray Suarez will be reporting from the field MORE, not less. This is already in place … case in point, Margaret’s recent trip to Pakistan and Afghanistan, Ray’s reporting from Mexico. Foreign field reporting by NewsHour correspondents will continue to expand – as our Global Health Unit continues to thrive as well as our other international reporting efforts. The relationship with GlobalPost adds to our current efforts by giving us greater responsiveness and versatility as events happen around the globe where they already have reporters on the ground.”

Newshour notes that while the program will be working collaboratively with the GlobalPost correspondents and jointly producing segments, The NewsHour will maintain editorial control at all times.

Thanks, Newshour. That’s very helpful.

Now, from the level of professional communications, compare the clear and helpful response from Newshour versus the confrontational demands and threats from GlobalPost. Night and day. Seasoned PR pro versus PR amateur, in my opinion. But, I also wonder whether GlobalPost’s response reflects an unusual hint of news management or just a PR gaff?

GlobalPost responded today by demanding that my blog post be removed. I’ve never before heard of a so-called news organization making such a demand because it flies in the face of free speech.

The guy at GlobalPost used words like “disparage” which is legal saber-rattling. Why not just a response laying out their position, as they see it? Why don’t they just say they went online in January 2009 and explain what they’ve done in the last eleven months?

GlobalPost, in my opinion, was created to take advantage of the need television news organizations have for international coverage at a much lower cost. Foreign bureaus are expensive. Stringers are not. The TV networks … and all of TV news … are struggling financially. They can no longer afford foreign bureaus. GlobalPost answers a need – cheaper international coverage. But, I ask … at what cost to us, the viewers?

Today, I received the following email from a fellow who says he is the communications and marketing person at GlobalPost. I am posting his email here to show what I consider to be the troubling, threatening tone of this outfit, and I invite your comments:

Mr. Henderson:

I received your message yesterday, but I couldn’t quite make out your phone number and couldn’t return the call. I saw your post “PBS Newshour Outsources International News,” and your article is so riddled with errors and inaccuracies that we request you remove it immediately.

I have to wonder if you spent a single second researching GlobalPost. I have to conclude that you didn’t, because if you had you would have easily found on our site — or in hundreds of articles posted by major news organizations, including the New York Times, that describe GlobalPost’s model in detail – that GlobalPost is not an “international news aggregator blog.” We don’t aggregate content and we are not a blog. If you had done the slightest bit of research, you would have learned that we are a news organization with a network of 70 credentialed journalists filing stories to us from 50 countries. Yes, they are freelancers, but they also have a contract with GlobalPost to deliver stories each week. All of our correspondents are career journalists. While you write: “some you’ve hear of and many you’ve never heard of,” many are award-winning veteran journalists that have reported for major US news organizations, including: the New York Times, the Washington Post, Time magazine, Newsweek, CNN, FOX News, the Associated Press, Reuters and NPR, among many others. The network includes two Pulitzer Prize winners and the editorial output is vetted and managed by a group of top-notch editors in Boston under the direction of our Executive Editor Charles M. Sennott, a respected career journalist and foreign reporter.

You also would have learned, if you had done one iota of reporting, that the Huffington Post and Bill O’Reilly are marketing partnerships – we do not share any editorial responsibility for the content. Those sites give our original content wider reach by displaying it for their audiences, and we are proud of those partnerships. The announcement released yesterday about our partnership with the NewsHour is clear that we will be working together on the segments that appear on their air. Last night on the NewsHour, they did a two-way interview from Kandahar with our correspondent Ben Gilbert. Gilbert’s work has aired on NPR, the PRI/BBC program “The World,” the Canadian Broadcasting Co., BBC and ABC Radio. Gilbert’s articles have appeared in US News and World Report and the San Francisco Chronicle. He spent two years for NPR as Baghdad producer, filing for NPR’s “Newscast,” “All Things Considered,” “Morning Edition” and “Day to Day.” He then spent six months in Iraq as bureau chief for Voice of America and “Marketplace.” Is that experienced enough for you?

You should be very careful before you suggest that GlobalPost is “devoid of professional journalistic standards” without any evidence to back it up. Our organization is built on the ideal of professional journalistic standards and we are confident that our reporting lives up to that ideal.

If you consider yourself a journalist, we ask that you accept responsibility for the errors in your piece and remove it. You have disparaged our organization and our people. We are available to talk and I await your response.

Rick Byrne

Rick Byrne
Director of Communications & Marketing
GlobalPost
The Pilot House/Lewis Wharf
Boston, MA 02110
rbyrne@globalpost.com
617-854-3184
www.globalpost.com

It should be noted that neither GlobalPost nor Byrne were available to “talk” yesterday before my blog piece was posted.

Let me also call attention to one distortion in Byrne’s email. I did not make a statement about “devoid of professional journalistic standards.” I merely asked a rhetorical question. It was he who made the statement in the email above.

Newshour, the respected television news program on PBS, announced today it is partnering with GlobalPost.com, a Boston company that runs an international news aggregator blog.

Newshour now joins the likes of Bill O’Reilly, Huffington Post and CBS News in using GlobalPost’s international news covering services. CBS News, once renowned for its galaxy of international news bureaus, has closed everything to save money and now doesn’t have many options left.

GlobalPost.com is run by an entrepreneur and a former Boston Globe reporter. Their venture uses freelance reporters – some you’ve hear of and many you’ve never heard of.

The Newshour-GlobalPost.com announcement today raises more questions than it answers. The questions I have as a former CBS News foreign correspondent are:

1. What happens to Newshour’s long-time relationship with London-based ITN News, a highly respected news organization, to get international coverage?
2. Why is Newshour making this change?
3. Is Newshour concerned over issues of unvetted foreign news sources?
4. How can viewers be assured of accurate and unbiased coverage?
5. How can Newshour viewers trust the news sources of GlobalPost.com?
6. Is Newshour concerned about putting its reputation in the same basket with agenda-driven news outfits?
7. What does Newshour hope to gain by turning to an international coverage blog for its news?
8. How will the idea of Newshour pooling the same style of international reporting with Huffington and O’Reilly go over with Newshour viewers and supporters who expect high standards?
9. How will Newshour cope with GlobalPost’s apparent lack of track record and credentials as a news organization?

The GlobalPost.com model is not unlike the use of Vocus in the PR industry. Vocus merely consolidates client media lists – rubbish in, rubbish out – in order supposedly blast press releases to a greater number of reporters … a style that is, in fact, opposite from how media relations is practiced in today’s digital era. On second thought, maybe GlobalPost doesn’t look too bad against Vocus.

Will we start to see international coverage on Newshour that’s recycled from other sources and devoid of professional journalistic standards? I guess we will see if Newshour thinks the gamble is worth it.

Talk show host Jim Bohannon (left) with David

I like radio talk show host Jim Bohannon. Always have. He’s one of the classiest people on radio today, and Jim’s been on radio for years … with a large and loyal following, coast-to-coast.

The late night Jim Bohannon Show airs around 11 p.m. on hundreds of radio stations in many places, and his program America in the Morning wakes up Americans nationwide to news and information in dozens of cities and towns. His guests include world thought-leaders, political and corporate leaders … and, people like me.

For a guy like me, with a new book to promote (“Making News in the Digital Era“), it’s a dream program … a full hour to discuss issues contained in the book and take calls from listeners, all live.

You can listen to all or part of my interview with Jim by clicking here.

Jim’s program airs weekday nights on the Westwood One Radio Network and originates from the CBS News studios in Washington, D.C.

His Web site delivers on-demand streaming audio of all programs. Click here.

Thanks, Jim!

Dan Gillmor

The Washington Post – the once-legendary newspaper in the nation’s capital – continues to stumble and crumble along, the victim of an increasing number of self-inflicted ethical mistakes. A few months ago, it was about the egregious attempt by publisher Katharine Weymouth to sell her paper’s editorial influence to Washington lobbyists. Now, the Post has issued an edict that sharply restricts how its employees can express their opinions online.

The bosses at the Post sent around a memo recently of rules that read, in part:

Post journalists must refrain from writing, tweeting or posting anything—including photographs or video—that could be perceived as reflecting political, racial, sexist, religious or other bias or favoritism that could be used to tarnish our journalistic credibility. This same caution should be used when joining, following or friending any person or organization online.

When I read that, my first impression was that the Post’s “journalistic credibility” is already in tatters, thanks to the likes of Weymouth and her socialite crowd who have little experience in journalism. It’s almost as if they are, in their naive arrogance, working to kill the famous newspaper that is already on life-support because of a series of business mistakes over the last decade.

By restricting its journalists and employees from engaging in online social media, the paper clearly does not comprehend today’s culture of openness and transparency that’s a hallmark of online conversations and a mandate for corporate America to survive. We no longer live in a time when businesses or newspapers can control the conversation.

I believe that the people who run the Post, living in a cocoon of hubris, neither respect nor comprehend the power and influence of today’s evolving forms of discourse.

But, no one has summed up the Post’s latest mistake better than Dan Gillmor, one person I consider to be among the most knowledgeable and credible in the online world of communications. Click here to read his commentary about the Post.