Text Journalists Should Stick to Their Keyboards

I’m sorry to be seeing and hearing so many of America’s ranking journalists. And why is that?

The mission of the journalist is to Find Stuff Out, and ideally convey the Stuff clearly, concisely and accurately. That’s why we bemoan the shrinkage and even closure of so many news staffs, particularly at the local level. We don’t find out.

In order to survive and even thrive in this new media environment, news organizations believe they must “engage” better with their intended audiences. Part of that strategy now entails various interfaces: podcasts (audio and video), other forms of on-camera appearance or narration, and live events for targeted subscribers or clients. Increasingly, traditional text journalists–not just those who’ve always done TV or radio work–are out front for this.

So, we get to hear these reporters and editors recapitulate their news, sometimes in sound or video bites, sometimes in conversations with each other or with a moderator who “interviews” them. At an event, the journalist may exchange on stage with a notable (or, I should say, even more notable).

In some ways, everybody gains from greater exposure to the people behind the news. For the boss, maybe this gets more productivity out of the talent–certainly more social-media sharing. But I’d argue that, with few exceptions, the hours spent producing this “content” is time not spent Finding Stuff Out. Time not on the phones or the web, not working the beat with sources. Ultimately, we end up with less news per dollar invested (and there’s less of that, to boot).

In the olden days, some print people would get assembled for weekly broadcast roundup shows. Later, 24/7 cable news would fill minutes with such talking heads. I never learned much from any of that, compared to reading what they actually published. I still don’t think I’m gaining much from watching or listening to journos whose most useful tool remains a keyboard.