Main Page Content:
Richard SambrookRSS feed
-

Andrew Keen on journalism: audio highlights

Posted by Martin Stabe on 7 September 2007 at 13:16
Tags: Andrew Keen, BBC, Computer-Assisted Reporting, FarmSubsidy.org, Richard Sambrook

There were some very interesting exchanges in last night’s Frontline Club discussion between Web 2.0 critic Andrew Keen and BBC resident new media evangelist and director of global news Richard Sambrook.

Keen brimmed with contempt for those he called the “digital utopians”. Much of his argument seems to be motivated by personal dislike for a handful of prominent new media thinkers — Dave Winer, Jeff Jarvis, Chris Anderson, Tim O’Reilly and Laurence Lessig were repeatedly mentioned by name. Keen says this Web 2.0 crowd combines 1960s counter-culture anti-authoritarianism, with 1980s free-market capitalism and 1990s technophilia and want to replace traditional journalism with blogs. I suspect they would all dispute that characterisation in their different ways.

A bit like his book, the good bits in the discussion were hidden away between sweeping generalisations (”bloggers don’t buy books” was my personal favourite) and personal jabs. The first highlight was an interesting exchange about trust in journalism mentioned earlier.

Keen and Sambrook also talked about the role blogs could have in the future training of journalists. Sambrook says blogging is a useful, if insufficient, training ground for journalists:

In the same clip, Keen accuses “Dave Winer, Jeff Jarvis and the rest of the mob” of arguing that bloggers do replace, rather than supplement journalists. He says British audiences have recognised that his polemical book is a tongue-in-cheek better than American audieneces.

The strongest point in Keen’s book is that because there is no guarantee of an editorial quality control process, online media demand greater media literacy from their readers — and that this may not actually be in place in society. Unfortunately, he and Sambrook only touched on this point briefly:

During the question & answer session, Keen asked Sambrook about whether the BBC had dumbed down over the past 25 years by pandering to popular interest by running more and more stories about things like Britney Spears. Sambrook deftly evaded the question, but revealed that the most most searched-for term on the BBC News site is, yes, “Britney Spears”.

(Be warned: There’s an extreme close-up recording of a glass of water being poured in this clip!)

One great comment came from Jack Thurston, who runs the award-winning FarmSubsidy.org, a database of Common Agricultural Policy data in a publicly-searchable database.

“Mainstream journalists and mainstream newspapers have lost the ability to run serious in-depth investigations that take a lot of time, a lot of expertise and a methodical approach to a subject, and that gap has been filled by a combination of the journalists who are still hanging on to this traditional and increasingly people online who are expert database programmers or bloggers in some cases.”

Thurston said FarmSubsidy.org had generated many stories by sharing its data with mainstream journalists who otherwise wouldn’t have found it.

Thurston said: “The Washington Post is probably the only exception because it sometimes mounts a big team that will do this type of investigation. But it seems to me that most journalists — whether they’re on the Guardian, on the Herald Tribune or the New York Times — are kind of gifted generalists. And in a way they are the amateurs now because they are the ones who are drawing up on the expertise that is distributed out there that the internet allows to permeate up.”

As a new example of this sort of database journalism being done by non-journalist experts online, Thurston highlighed UNdemocracy. The site, which was launched in beta with no fanfare, makes UN documents searchable and available to the public for the first time.

Read More: The Frontline Club’s own blog has a full account.

-

Sambrook: transparency and humility essential to trust in journalists (audio)

Posted by Martin Stabe on 7 September 2007 at 10:55
Tags: Andrew Keen, BBC, Fox News, Guardian, Richard Sambrook, Television, The Sun, The Sun Online

“Arrogance” was a major part of how the BBC “tripped up” in reporting the story that led to the Hutton inquiry, and journalists should show greater humility and transparency, the BBC’s director of global news, Richard Sambrook, has said.

Sambrook made the comment last night while interviewing Web 2.0 critic and Cult of the Amateur author Andrew Keen at the Frontline Club in London.

Sambrook’s remarks came during an exchange about trust in the media, after Keen had argued that journalists “should be more arrogant”.

“There’s a crisis of confidence in mainstream journalists,” Keen said.

“They need to be more arrogant. They need to remind people that they are seasoned professionals, the way doctors and lawyers and chefs do.

“Why apologise to the public? I see that more and more: The idea that we don’t know any more than you, so you should be telling us we should be reporting.If that’s true, all of you should just resign. Let’s just have the blogosphere.”

Sambrook disputed this view, saying that the real problem is that there isn’t enough humility or transparency in journalism.

“Yes, we do have expertise or skill, but we we’re not going to get the credit that may be conferred on that if we behave arrogantly or say ‘we know best’,” said Sambrook.

When Keen challenged Sambrook to offer an example where the BBC has been “really screwed up” or should have shown more humility, Sambrook mentioned the crisis that engulfed the BBC following Andrew Gilligan’s May 2003 Today programme report that the Blair government had, against the wishes of intelligence agencies, “sexed up” a dossier on the case for going to war in Iraq. That report was followed by the death of Gilligan’s source, Dr David Kelly, and led to the Hutton inquiry. Sambrook was director of BBC News during the crisis and testified before the inquiry.

“Personally, I think we got a lot of things right, but where we went wrong and where it became a crisis was because Andrew Gillian was sloppy — and he was sloppy probably because there was a touch of arrogance there. And the Today programme was overly defensive, probably because there was a touch of arrogance there.”

“Actually the story was right. Others may disagree with that, but I think the story was right but we tripped up because of our arrogance, which covered up a degree of sloppiness and let the government and other critics come in and the whole thing kicked off.”

Journalism’s gatekeeping function requires professionalism, not arrogance, Sambrook went on to say. Making decisions about what to report should be based on reassons, which should be open and transparent.

“If one of our journalists makes a statement on TV as a professional judgment, then I would hope they have some evidence or backing behind that to justify that - and by showing that evidence, the public can have faith in their professional judgment. If they just say ‘hey I’m a really clever person, I’m cleverer than you and I say this’, why would you trust them? I wouldn’t.”

See also:

E-mail Newsletter Signup

Weekly bulletins