Is it important that reporters understand the business model of their publisher/broadcaster?
The question came up last week at the McGraw Symposium, one of the sessions at the Society of American Business Editors and Writers‘ Fall Conference.
Rebecca Blumenstein of the Wall Street Journal suggested that it didn’t hurt as long as the divide between the church and state of the journalistic institution remains intact.
Andy Serwer of Yahoo Finance noted that he would kind of wonder about his reporters if they didn’t take an interest in how their outfit was making money. They are, after all, business reporters, he pointed out; curiosity about how money is made should be part of the DNA.
Of course, understanding how money is made in the media business is getting pretty complicated. Programmatic buying, ad auctions, third-party networks, 360 deals, native advertising, branded content, roadblocks, interstitials — the concepts and jargon are getting pretty thick. These days it takes a little study time to understand how money is made (or not) in the news business.
Beyond that, the worry that journalists would change their behavior if they knew exactly how money was made is a bit overwrought. Plenty of journalists understand that the more readers or viewers they draw the better it is for their employer. Yet they haven’t turned into sensationalistic click-bait mongers. Indeed attempts at paying journalists by the click haven’t been hugely successful, Serwer noted.
Now whether business understanding of a media enterprise affects coverage is a different issue and speaks more to ethics than knowledge. Drawing the ire of a major advertiser has been a journalistic concern since we started painting Mastodon hunt results on cave walls.
But how the paint is paid for? It’s probably good for everyone to know. That way we can concentrate on keeping it coming.
Allen Wastler is the former managing editor of CNBC.com and the former managing editor of CNNMoney.com. He can be reached at awastler@gmail.com.
