This is the first of three articles that examines and considers a paper entitled “If Not Journalists, Who?” The paper is by Dr. Gavin Ellis and is published under the banner of Koi Tu: The Centre for Informed Futures of the University of Auckland. The paper is subtitled “A position paper on New Zealand’s news media.
This first article introduces the paper and outlines Dr. Ellis’s proposals. It then moves to consider some of the drivers for media regulation. Dr Ellis at the conclusion of the paper suggests a regulatory model similar to that proposed by the Law Commission as long ago as 2013 but with adaptations. Therefore I considered it useful to look at some of those proposals because they provide a framework for future development. This first article considers what has changed in the 10 years or so since the Law Commission proposals.
The second article in the series considers the issue of social cohesion. This phrase appears with some regularity as a purpose for a trusted media. It is a phrase that has been used frequently and the concept seems important in a time of apparent increasing divisiveness in society. It is also a matter that has been the subject of examination by two papers emerging from Koi Tu to which consideration is given and which form the basis for the second article.
The third article in the series returns to Dr Ellis’s proposals and lines them up alongside those of the Law Commission. I consider the solution proposed in that light and offer some proposals of my own for the future of media regulation
Introduction
Dr Gavin Ellis is an honorary research fellow with Koi Tu: The Centre for Informed Futures. He is a well known media commentator and expert. A former editor-in-chief of the New Zealand Herald, he lectured on media and communications at the University of Auckland for a decade. He was made an Officer of the New Zealand Order of Merit in 2015 for services to journalism and is the recipient of the Commonwealth Astor Award for Press Freedom. He has written a paper entitled “If Not Journalists, Then Who?” which was released on 1 May 2024.
The paper paints a picture of an industry facing existential threats and held back by institutional underpinnings that are beyond the point where they are merely outdated. It suggests sweeping changes to deal with the wide impacts of digital transformation and alarmingly low levels of trust in news.
The paper is very detailed and thorough as one would expect. It is not the purpose of this article to critique or examine the analysis that Dr Ellis has painstakingly provided. But I do intend in this series of articles to examine some of his proposals and recommendations for changes to news media which should enhance the position of the Fourth Estate in the community.
After I have outlined the proposals I shall, in this first article, provide some contextual background and consider a similar examination that was conducted by the Law Commission between 2010 and 2013. Dr. Ellis refers to this examination and some of the recommendations that were made.
I shall also discuss why it was that no action was taken on the Law Commission proposals (with one exception) and then go on to consider what has changed in the last ten years that prompt a re-examination of the news media landscape.
One of the elements that becomes very clear is that of trust in the media and the need for social cohesion. Koi Tu has done a considerable amount of work in the area of social cohesion. It is a concept that should be easily understood from the words used but has layers of nuance as far as a basis for regulatory models is concerned. A consideration of this issue appears in the second article in the series.
I shall conclude in the third article by returning to Dr. Ellis’ proposals and consider what it is that is really proposed as a regulatory model and the implications not only for journalism and the news media but also for freedom of expression and the free exchange of ideas and information in the Digital Paradigm.
Gavin Ellis’ proposals
D
r. Ellis sees a need for changes in the media sector and identified five areas for those changes.
1. Rebuilding Trust and Reducing News Avoidance: News media organizations need to review their practices to rebuild trust and reduce the number of individuals who avoid consuming news. This involves addressing issues such as bias, misinformation, and sensationalism, and providing audiences with the ability to clearly distinguish between fact and opinion.
2. Overcoming Dominance of Digital Platforms: The dominance of unregulated transnational digital platforms in the media market needs to be addressed. Measures should be taken to ensure fair competition and compensate media organizations for the direct and indirect use of their content by digital platforms.
3. Supporting Pluralistic Media: Sustainable and publicly acceptable ways of supporting pluralistic media at national, regional, local, and hyper-local levels need to be found. This includes exploring funding models and mechanisms to ensure the continued existence of diverse media outlets.
4. Adapting to Technological Changes: The media sector needs to adapt to technological changes, such as the transition from linear to digital delivery of media services and the impact of artificial intelligence. Strategies should be developed to ensure an orderly transition and to address the challenges and opportunities presented by new technologies.
5. Reforming Regulatory Systems and Laws: Outdated regulatory systems and laws need to be reformed to address the impacts of social media and ensure effective governance of the media sector. This includes reviewing legislation related to content standards, complaint adjudication, funding allocation, and harmful content, as well as addressing issues of reputation, privacy, and intellectual property rights.
The options proposed by Dr Ellis likewise fall into five major areas:
1. The value of the media sector to democracy and social cohesion
2. A level playing field
3. Technology
4. Media law and regulation
5. Financially sustaining democratically significant journalism.
Under each of these headings Dr. Ellis proposes certain options. In this article I want to restrict my consideration to two of these options. I accept that in many respects the various proposals that Dr. Ellis has made are interlinked but in my view are not so dependent upon one another that they cannot be considered separately.
The two options I want to consider are those of democracy and social cohesion and, not unsurprisingly, media law and regulation.
I shall outline the proposals for each of these headings. Then I shall go on to first consider the topic of media law and regulation, followed by a consideration of democracy and especially the concept of social cohesion.
Keep reading with a 7-day free trial
Subscribe to A Halfling's View to keep reading this post and get 7 days of free access to the full post archives.