P O L I T I C A L , S O C I A L AND I N S T I T U T I O N A L BARRIERS T O
ENVIRONMENTAL INFORMATION
A Commentary PETER DESBARATS Graduate School of Journalism, The University of Western Ontario
Workshop sponsored by the Institute for Research on Environment and Economy, University of Ottawa, March 5-6, 1990
Although part of Dr. Bregha's paper related specifically to my own area of interest, where he discussed 'ineffective media coverage' as a barrier to information transmission, I want to deal initially with Prof. Nelson's distinction between synoptic and pluralist. I found, on reading this paper, that it was inadvertently but strikingly relevant to news media. As Prof. Nelson states at the outset of his paper, the synoptic or rational approach to the problem under discussion implies that 'institutional arrangements can be rather readily divided into those that are barriers and those that are favorable to a better flow of information.' He opposes this to a pluralist perspective where 'institutional arrangements are not viewed as machinery or technology' but as 'learned behaviour, much of which is ultimately beyond accurate technical analysis and portrayal and so precise understanding and design.' It occurred to me, as I read this, that news media, in their structure and working methods, often provide striking examples of the synoptic approach. This is not to say that the pluralist approach is not present at all in news media but it exists as a kind of subversive underground movement at war with the dominant synoptics, if I can use that term to describe media owners and a majority of senior news personnel. To those who have worked in them, or to the rare individuals who have studied them objectively [1], among the most apparent characteristics of news media are their hierarchical structure and authoritative management style. This is particularly true of North American newspapers. The image of the tough editor remains powerful in newspaper journalism. In 1986, an American media scholar wrote that 'few values are as strong in American journalism as toughness' [2]. From the moment they enter a newsroom, young journalists are fitted into a system that rewards obedience, conformity and productivity. Journalists take their cue from salaried editors and publishers who conform to the dictates of media owners. How little room for independent manoeuvre is allowed even to the editor of a major daily newspaper is evident in the recent memoirs of Senator Richard J. Doyle, editor of The Globe and Mail for 20 yr before his retirement in the early 1980s [3]. When push comes to shove, the pages of a newspaper belong to its owner. Doyle appeared to see his primary role on the Globe as being not a leader but a mediator between various publishers and his staff of journalists. Environmental Monitoring and Assessment 20: 213-216, 1992. 9 1992 Kluwer Academic Publishers. Printed in the Netherlands.
214
PETER
DESBARATS
Authority on a newspaper is delegated downward. Newspapers in their internal operations are not democratic but despotic. Some might say that this is the natural result of the hurried, even frantic nature of the business - decisions have to be made and orders carried out quickly - but I suspect that it has more to do with the fact that newspapers in North America are business enterprises and tend to operate along business lines... remarkably old-fashioned business lines, in many cases. It also has something to do with the fact that newspaper journalism is produced, at the very beginning of the whole process, by individual journalists who work independently under the guidance or leadership of a team of editors who work collectively. Television journalism, on the other hand, is a collective enterprise. A television journalist relies on a cameraman, a producer, perhaps a researcher, a videotape editor and other technicians. This encourages a sharing of ideas and a pooling of skills at the level of news production. But even in television journalism, strong editorial control is exerted from the top. And modern telecommunications now make it possible for editors in New York or Toronto to maintain close contact with journalists in the field and to supervise the construction of their audiovisual reports in minute detail. Journalism is also a competitive business, not only between media organizations but between journalists working for the same newspaper or television station. An American social scientist who spent three years observing journalists at The New York Times in the 1970s wrote that the system was characterized by intense competition and a low level of trust among reporters and editors. Innovation was discouraged, decision-making was centralized, differences among departments of the newspaper were suppressed rather than discussed, and secrecy was endemic [4]. Another indication of the synoptic nature of the newspaper business is found in newspapers' response to their most serious current problem. Newspapers in North America today are preoccupied with trends that reveal stagnant or declining circulations and ageing readership. Their response to this is typical of managers who believe that 'institutional arrangements can be rather readily divided into those that are barriers and those that are favorable to a better flow of information.' It is to regard the newspaper as an information utility with a marketing problem. When the marketing experts report that dense columns of small type, long stories and complex reports represent barriers to an easy flow of information between newspapers and their readers, newspapers are re-designed to reduce these barriers. At least one experienced observer of U.S. media has recently wondered whether this systematic but cosmetic approach really tackles the main problem that newspapers face. Prof. Jay Rosen of the journalism faculty at New York University sees the decline of public spaces, public activity and public discussion in American cities as reasons for the growing irrelevance of American newspapers to many urban dwellers [5]. However, as this problem requires a pluralist approach because of its pluralist nature, newspapers seem unable or unwilling to consider it. They prefer, as dedicated 'synoptics,' to tinker with graphics, page design and story length as well as new technologies for transmitting information more efficiently to individual readers by phone, fax, videotex or teletext. All this is relevant to this discussion if, as Prof. Nelson maintains, only a pluralist
COMMENTS
215
approach can be effective in solving environmental problems. It means that journalists are conditioned by the nature of their own news enterprises to prefer the synoptic approach. When presented with choices between the two, for example, in their coverage of proposed solutions to environmental problems, they will instinctively favor the synoptic. At least this is my suspicion, triggered by Prof. Nelson's paper. It would be interesting to investigate it further. I might add, as an aside, that there was a time in the 1960s and 1970s when some journalists did attempt to bring a pluralist approach into the newsroom, particularly in the French-language newspapers of Quebec. This attempt to democratize news operations, influenced by models on the European continent, produced little in the way of lasting results. Finally, Prof. Nelson's comments on the role of community institutions in a pluralist approach to development made me think of the important role that community newspapers play in maintaining the vitality of local institutions. It may be significant that weekly community newspapers have been expanding in recent years while audiences for daily newspapers and network television newscasts have been static or in decline. However, it may also be significant that this growth has been accompanied by a trend toward consolidation. An increasing number of weeklies are being absorbed by large groups owned, in some cases, by daily newspapers. This represents another victory for the synoptic approach but certainly not for those who believe that environmental solutions require a diversity of voices at the community level. Dr. Bregha's comments on ineffective media coverage require little more than corroboration from me. He reported that only 32 out of 115 Canadian daily newspapers list an environmental reporter among their staff positions. 1 would have expected a lower total; Dr. Bregha did note that many of these 32 also cover other beats. It would be interesting to know how many of these 'specialists' actually have received university degrees or training of some sort related to this aspect of their reporting. Some indication of the priority that environmental journalism occupies on Canadian newspapers came several years go when the Globe and Mail tried to transfer Michael Keating, probably the most knowledgeable environmental journalist in the country at that time, to another beat. Instead, he left the Globe for private consulting. This all-toofrequent type of occurrence on Canadian dailies reinforces Dr. Bregha's observation that reporters are rotated too frequently as well as being paid poor wages and receiving poor training. Unfortunately, in this area as in most others related to Canadian journalism, we have little data. A survey of 302 Canadian journalists published in 198516] revealed that their median age was 32.2 - indicating that most journalists spent less than 10 yr in the industry - that only 54% had started a post-secondary program and that 88% had completed post-secondary education. The mean annual income for all journalists was $26764. A new contract signed by journalists at the Globe last year provided an annual salary of about $50000 for journalists with at least five years' experience. This is about the same income as a rookie policeman earns in Toronto. A survey of half the 480 journalists working for Quebec's nine French-language dailies
216
PETER DESBARATS
in 1980 showed that only 37% had a university degree [7]. My own observations as a working journalist, and my experience at Western, leads me to believe that few journalists have studied science. Most applicants to our Graduate School of Journalism have degrees in the humanities or social sciences. In fact, the journalistic mentality, with its emphasis on quick synthesis, may be the opposite of the scientific mentality. This presents a significant barrier to communication between scientists and journalists. One of the solutions described by Dr. Bregha is 'more and better qualified environmental reporters.' Within the next few weeks, I hope to announce that our School will make an initial effort in this direction. With the support of the Chemical Producers Association of Canada, we will launch a study with the aim of introducing in 1991 a short ourse for journalists in environmental 'literacy'. We already offer two-week courses every spring in law and economics for journalists - the only regular program of professional development for journalists in Canada - and we have identified the improvement of environmental journalism as our next objective. Or does that sound too much like a synoptic approach? References [1] The most recent and comprehensive study of newsroom structures and methods in Canada has been provided by criminologist Richard V. Ericson and co-workers at the University of Toronto in Visualizing Deviance: A Study of News Organization (1987) and Negotiating Control: A Study of News Sources (1989), both published by University of Toronto Press. [2] Edmund B. Lambeth: 1986, Committed Journalism, Bloomington, Ind.: Indiana University Press, 56. [3] Richard J. Doyle: 1990, Hurly-Burly - A Time at The Globe, Toronto: Macmillan. [4] Chris Argyris: 1974, Behind the Front Page, San Francisco: Jossey-Bass, p. 239. [5] Jay Rosen: 1989, 'Newspapers' Future Depends on Shaping Trends in how People Live', ASNE (American Society of Newspaper Editors) Bulletin, pp. 15-19. [6] George Pollard: 1985, 'Canadian Newsworkers: A Cross-Media Analysis of Professional and Personal Attributes', Canadian Journal of Communication 11, No. 3, 269-286. [7] Florian Sauvageau: 1981, 'French-Speaking Journalists on Journalism', in Robert Fulford et al., The Journalists, Royal commission on Newspapers, Research Studies on the Newspaper Industry, Vol. 2, Ottawa: Supply and Services Canada, pp. 43-52.
ENVIRONMENTAL INFORMATION
A Commentary PETER DESBARATS Graduate School of Journalism, The University of Western Ontario
Workshop sponsored by the Institute for Research on Environment and Economy, University of Ottawa, March 5-6, 1990
Although part of Dr. Bregha's paper related specifically to my own area of interest, where he discussed 'ineffective media coverage' as a barrier to information transmission, I want to deal initially with Prof. Nelson's distinction between synoptic and pluralist. I found, on reading this paper, that it was inadvertently but strikingly relevant to news media. As Prof. Nelson states at the outset of his paper, the synoptic or rational approach to the problem under discussion implies that 'institutional arrangements can be rather readily divided into those that are barriers and those that are favorable to a better flow of information.' He opposes this to a pluralist perspective where 'institutional arrangements are not viewed as machinery or technology' but as 'learned behaviour, much of which is ultimately beyond accurate technical analysis and portrayal and so precise understanding and design.' It occurred to me, as I read this, that news media, in their structure and working methods, often provide striking examples of the synoptic approach. This is not to say that the pluralist approach is not present at all in news media but it exists as a kind of subversive underground movement at war with the dominant synoptics, if I can use that term to describe media owners and a majority of senior news personnel. To those who have worked in them, or to the rare individuals who have studied them objectively [1], among the most apparent characteristics of news media are their hierarchical structure and authoritative management style. This is particularly true of North American newspapers. The image of the tough editor remains powerful in newspaper journalism. In 1986, an American media scholar wrote that 'few values are as strong in American journalism as toughness' [2]. From the moment they enter a newsroom, young journalists are fitted into a system that rewards obedience, conformity and productivity. Journalists take their cue from salaried editors and publishers who conform to the dictates of media owners. How little room for independent manoeuvre is allowed even to the editor of a major daily newspaper is evident in the recent memoirs of Senator Richard J. Doyle, editor of The Globe and Mail for 20 yr before his retirement in the early 1980s [3]. When push comes to shove, the pages of a newspaper belong to its owner. Doyle appeared to see his primary role on the Globe as being not a leader but a mediator between various publishers and his staff of journalists. Environmental Monitoring and Assessment 20: 213-216, 1992. 9 1992 Kluwer Academic Publishers. Printed in the Netherlands.
214
PETER
DESBARATS
Authority on a newspaper is delegated downward. Newspapers in their internal operations are not democratic but despotic. Some might say that this is the natural result of the hurried, even frantic nature of the business - decisions have to be made and orders carried out quickly - but I suspect that it has more to do with the fact that newspapers in North America are business enterprises and tend to operate along business lines... remarkably old-fashioned business lines, in many cases. It also has something to do with the fact that newspaper journalism is produced, at the very beginning of the whole process, by individual journalists who work independently under the guidance or leadership of a team of editors who work collectively. Television journalism, on the other hand, is a collective enterprise. A television journalist relies on a cameraman, a producer, perhaps a researcher, a videotape editor and other technicians. This encourages a sharing of ideas and a pooling of skills at the level of news production. But even in television journalism, strong editorial control is exerted from the top. And modern telecommunications now make it possible for editors in New York or Toronto to maintain close contact with journalists in the field and to supervise the construction of their audiovisual reports in minute detail. Journalism is also a competitive business, not only between media organizations but between journalists working for the same newspaper or television station. An American social scientist who spent three years observing journalists at The New York Times in the 1970s wrote that the system was characterized by intense competition and a low level of trust among reporters and editors. Innovation was discouraged, decision-making was centralized, differences among departments of the newspaper were suppressed rather than discussed, and secrecy was endemic [4]. Another indication of the synoptic nature of the newspaper business is found in newspapers' response to their most serious current problem. Newspapers in North America today are preoccupied with trends that reveal stagnant or declining circulations and ageing readership. Their response to this is typical of managers who believe that 'institutional arrangements can be rather readily divided into those that are barriers and those that are favorable to a better flow of information.' It is to regard the newspaper as an information utility with a marketing problem. When the marketing experts report that dense columns of small type, long stories and complex reports represent barriers to an easy flow of information between newspapers and their readers, newspapers are re-designed to reduce these barriers. At least one experienced observer of U.S. media has recently wondered whether this systematic but cosmetic approach really tackles the main problem that newspapers face. Prof. Jay Rosen of the journalism faculty at New York University sees the decline of public spaces, public activity and public discussion in American cities as reasons for the growing irrelevance of American newspapers to many urban dwellers [5]. However, as this problem requires a pluralist approach because of its pluralist nature, newspapers seem unable or unwilling to consider it. They prefer, as dedicated 'synoptics,' to tinker with graphics, page design and story length as well as new technologies for transmitting information more efficiently to individual readers by phone, fax, videotex or teletext. All this is relevant to this discussion if, as Prof. Nelson maintains, only a pluralist
COMMENTS
215
approach can be effective in solving environmental problems. It means that journalists are conditioned by the nature of their own news enterprises to prefer the synoptic approach. When presented with choices between the two, for example, in their coverage of proposed solutions to environmental problems, they will instinctively favor the synoptic. At least this is my suspicion, triggered by Prof. Nelson's paper. It would be interesting to investigate it further. I might add, as an aside, that there was a time in the 1960s and 1970s when some journalists did attempt to bring a pluralist approach into the newsroom, particularly in the French-language newspapers of Quebec. This attempt to democratize news operations, influenced by models on the European continent, produced little in the way of lasting results. Finally, Prof. Nelson's comments on the role of community institutions in a pluralist approach to development made me think of the important role that community newspapers play in maintaining the vitality of local institutions. It may be significant that weekly community newspapers have been expanding in recent years while audiences for daily newspapers and network television newscasts have been static or in decline. However, it may also be significant that this growth has been accompanied by a trend toward consolidation. An increasing number of weeklies are being absorbed by large groups owned, in some cases, by daily newspapers. This represents another victory for the synoptic approach but certainly not for those who believe that environmental solutions require a diversity of voices at the community level. Dr. Bregha's comments on ineffective media coverage require little more than corroboration from me. He reported that only 32 out of 115 Canadian daily newspapers list an environmental reporter among their staff positions. 1 would have expected a lower total; Dr. Bregha did note that many of these 32 also cover other beats. It would be interesting to know how many of these 'specialists' actually have received university degrees or training of some sort related to this aspect of their reporting. Some indication of the priority that environmental journalism occupies on Canadian newspapers came several years go when the Globe and Mail tried to transfer Michael Keating, probably the most knowledgeable environmental journalist in the country at that time, to another beat. Instead, he left the Globe for private consulting. This all-toofrequent type of occurrence on Canadian dailies reinforces Dr. Bregha's observation that reporters are rotated too frequently as well as being paid poor wages and receiving poor training. Unfortunately, in this area as in most others related to Canadian journalism, we have little data. A survey of 302 Canadian journalists published in 198516] revealed that their median age was 32.2 - indicating that most journalists spent less than 10 yr in the industry - that only 54% had started a post-secondary program and that 88% had completed post-secondary education. The mean annual income for all journalists was $26764. A new contract signed by journalists at the Globe last year provided an annual salary of about $50000 for journalists with at least five years' experience. This is about the same income as a rookie policeman earns in Toronto. A survey of half the 480 journalists working for Quebec's nine French-language dailies
216
PETER DESBARATS
in 1980 showed that only 37% had a university degree [7]. My own observations as a working journalist, and my experience at Western, leads me to believe that few journalists have studied science. Most applicants to our Graduate School of Journalism have degrees in the humanities or social sciences. In fact, the journalistic mentality, with its emphasis on quick synthesis, may be the opposite of the scientific mentality. This presents a significant barrier to communication between scientists and journalists. One of the solutions described by Dr. Bregha is 'more and better qualified environmental reporters.' Within the next few weeks, I hope to announce that our School will make an initial effort in this direction. With the support of the Chemical Producers Association of Canada, we will launch a study with the aim of introducing in 1991 a short ourse for journalists in environmental 'literacy'. We already offer two-week courses every spring in law and economics for journalists - the only regular program of professional development for journalists in Canada - and we have identified the improvement of environmental journalism as our next objective. Or does that sound too much like a synoptic approach? References [1] The most recent and comprehensive study of newsroom structures and methods in Canada has been provided by criminologist Richard V. Ericson and co-workers at the University of Toronto in Visualizing Deviance: A Study of News Organization (1987) and Negotiating Control: A Study of News Sources (1989), both published by University of Toronto Press. [2] Edmund B. Lambeth: 1986, Committed Journalism, Bloomington, Ind.: Indiana University Press, 56. [3] Richard J. Doyle: 1990, Hurly-Burly - A Time at The Globe, Toronto: Macmillan. [4] Chris Argyris: 1974, Behind the Front Page, San Francisco: Jossey-Bass, p. 239. [5] Jay Rosen: 1989, 'Newspapers' Future Depends on Shaping Trends in how People Live', ASNE (American Society of Newspaper Editors) Bulletin, pp. 15-19. [6] George Pollard: 1985, 'Canadian Newsworkers: A Cross-Media Analysis of Professional and Personal Attributes', Canadian Journal of Communication 11, No. 3, 269-286. [7] Florian Sauvageau: 1981, 'French-Speaking Journalists on Journalism', in Robert Fulford et al., The Journalists, Royal commission on Newspapers, Research Studies on the Newspaper Industry, Vol. 2, Ottawa: Supply and Services Canada, pp. 43-52.
