I missed this when it was posted three days ago, but it deserves reading. Juan Luis Cebrian, ceo of Spanish publishing company Grupo PRISA and former editor of El Pais, offered these thoughts at the Inter-American Press Association annual conference in Mexico City:
1. Newspapers cannot survive by just telling news that always arrives late.2. Newspapers will not die if they are able to promote collective reflection and dialogue. 3. Newspaper publishers and editors spend too much time looking at themselves. 4. Newspapers are under attack from the internet and free publications.
When a delegate asked, "What should journalists do?" Cebrian replied: "Journalism." The poster of the item, Spain's enthusiastic innovations pioneer, Juan Antonio Giner, commented: "I agree 100%."
Well, I agree with that whole-hearted support for journalism. But I can't give the earlier statements full marks. After all, No. 4 is hardly a penetrating new insight and No. 3 is arguable. Publishers should be looking at what's happening, should they not? As for No. 2, they surely will die unless they find ways of grasping hold of the digital revolution to transmit the news mentioned in No. 1.
But Cebrian's remarks did spur Giner to give us more to think about. Here's a list of ideas he'll be discussing in a paper he is preparing for the Spanish Newspaper Publishers Association's annual report on the state of the industry:
1. Newspapers must become the core of 24/7 breaking news information engines. 2. Newspapers must deliver unique, compelling and exclusive news and stories, and not just package old stuff. 3. Newspapers must hire the most talented, respected and curious reporters and editors with multi-media skills. 4. Newspapers must promote dramatic interaction with readers and advertisers. 5. Newspapers must make money. Money brings independence. With independence you get credibility. Credibility brings readers. Readers attract advertising. And with advertising you make money. As simple and as complicated as that. 6. Newspapers must believe in journalism. Period.
So, is Giner correct? Does his list offer real hope for the future newspapers, or is he digging his feet into the sands of history? Just as pertinently, is it all pie in the sky? For instance, simply asserting that newspapers must hire talented staff seems so obvious it doesn't require saying. What this list entirely fails to do is to explain how multi-platform journalism can work in practice. The real challenge is to find a coherent way of finding a relevant role for newsprint.
I'm sure Jeff Jarvis - who I regard as the foremost, forceful advocate of new thinking in this area - would not be alone in finding Giner's list somewhat counter-revolutionary. I'm pretty sure he's not even too keen on my continuing, lingering optimism about forging some kind of future role for newspapers. He believes in journalism too, of course. But, unlike Cebrian and Giner, he conceives of a journalism outside the newsprint format. Are they not guilty of thinking too little, too late?
