What better choice for my inaugural post than to discuss a film that deserves “front page” recognition.
For one year, Page One director Andrew Rossi followed reporters working on the New York Times’ Media Desk—a department created with a unique task in mind. Its reporters were to cover the transformation of Journalism, from a field based on a reader-reporter relationship to an interactive platform based largely online.
David Carr, the film’s central figure, is a former crack addict turned reporter. He knows what it’s like to overcome adversity. So he doesn’t bat an eye when faced with newspapers going bankrupt around the U.S., the serge in popularity of social media, and increased pressure to stay relevant to readers who can access news content any time and almost anywhere.
However, we begin to wonder when the Times recruits Brian Stelter, a blogger and social media devotee, to work for the Media Desk. Carr is startled by Stelter’s proficiency with Facebook and Twitter, refusing to participate in the new publishing platforms. But when he discovers how Facebook and Twitter can enhance the immediacy of news, Carr is hooked. His inspiring story, appreciation for Journalism as a craft, and dedication to what he calls “Times exceptionalism” make Carr one of the documentary’s most memorable players.
Page One provides some fascinating insights into the impact of the paper in the overall media landscape. It is said that if a story is on the front page of the Times, you’ll see it on the front of almost every other daily the next day. In 2011, 160 years after the Times printed its first edition, that is certainly something to be proud of. In the film, writers and editors point out that Daniel Ellsberg needed a newspaper to publish the Pentagon Papers (which were instrumental in the Watergate Scandal) in 1972, but WikiLeaks founder Julian Assange only needed the internet to publish his classified documents in 2010.
The good news is that Assange still went to the Times to publish an edited version of the documents. The underlying point of this scenario is that news institutions like the New York Times can remain relevant if they learn to grow and change with their readers.
Now more than ever, journalists function as interpreters of the multitude of information we receive on a daily basis. It is easy enough to see and hear about the news of the day, but finding a trusted source to interpret it for us is much more challenging.
Of course there are challenges for publishers and editors too. For the past 15 years, almost all news content on the internet has been free, but as more of us depend on internet news sources, newspapers may start making us pay for some of that content. Many newspapers now update there news coverage 24 hours a day, and comprehensive coverage takes money. If the remaining North American newspapers like the Times can transition smoothly into online media, they will be around for a long time. That is the message Page One tries to convey and I’d say it’s a pretty accurate one.
If the New York Times can be experts at interpretation, as they’ve been for every other type of Journalism for 160 years, they won’t be going anywhere any time soon.
