Dialectic of Gloom How the press survived the Great Recession of2008, after slashing its wrists and writing its own obituary by Brian Gorman, M.J. A thesis submitted to the Faculty of Graduate and Postdoctoral Affairs in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy in Communication Studies Carleton University Ottawa, Ontario ©2012 Brian Gorman Library and Archives Bibliotheque et Canada Archives Canada Published Heritage Direction du 1+1Branch Patrimoine de I'edition 395 Wellington Street 395, rue Wellington Ottawa ON K1A0N4 Ottawa ON K1A 0N4 Canada Canada Your file Votre reference ISBN: 978-0-494-94220-8 Our file Notre reference ISBN: 978-0-494-94220-8 NOTICE: AVIS: The author has granted a non­ L'auteur a accorde une licence non exclusive exclusive license allowing Library and permettant a la Bibliotheque et Archives Archives Canada to reproduce, Canada de reproduire, publier, archiver, publish, archive, preserve, conserve, sauvegarder, conserver, transmettre au public communicate to the public by par telecommunication ou par I'lnternet, preter, telecommunication or on the Internet, distribuer et vendre des theses partout dans le loan, distrbute and sell theses monde, a des fins commerciales ou autres, sur worldwide, for commercial or non­ support microforme, papier, electronique et/ou commercial purposes, in microform, autres formats. paper, electronic and/or any other formats. The author retains copyright L'auteur conserve la propriete du droit d'auteur ownership and moral rights in this et des droits moraux qui protege cette these. Ni thesis. Neither the thesis nor la these ni des extraits substantiels de celle-ci substantial extracts from it may be ne doivent etre imprimes ou autrement printed or otherwise reproduced reproduits sans son autorisation. without the author's permission. In compliance with the Canadian Conformement a la loi canadienne sur la Privacy Act some supporting forms protection de la vie privee, quelques may have been removed from this formulaires secondaires ont ete enleves de thesis. cette these. While these forms may be included Bien que ces formulaires aient inclus dans in the document page count, their la pagination, il n'y aura aucun contenu removal does not represent any loss manquant. of content from the thesis. Canada Abstract THE ‘DEATH of news’ panic that began in 2008 has painted a portrait of a business rendered obsolete by digital technology and being forced into extinction by a “broken business model.” However, a closer look at the press coverage reveals more complex circumstances, which must be placed in the context of 50 years of media theory to be appreciated. Unfortunately, as several observers have noted, the discourse has been dominated by a point of view that is business-focused and Western-centric. As a result, the conversation has excluded such constituencies, as small-city dailies, community newspapers, alternative publications, and the business in such emerging nations as India, China, Argentina, Brazil and sub-Saharan Africa, where daily journalism is surviving, and in some cases booming. Another characteristic of the conversation is that it ignores many years of criticism, as if there is an unspoken assumption that the “broken business model” has absolved the industry of such well documented shortcomings as: a tendency to practice ‘safe’ journalism that appeals to the affluent and provides a pleasant climate for advertising; a preoccupation with the rich and the powerful; the abandonment of investigative reporting. At the same time, the economic situation has, as Tina Brown put it, provided timely “air cover” for an industry that has long been run by corporations that have financed acquisitions with debt, while tying themselves to shareholder expectations of unrealistic profits—to the point that many profitable newspapers were forced by heavily indebted parent companies into rounds of layoffs that undermined the brands that were supposed to carry them into the digital age. New technology has presented large challenges for mainstream news businesses—not the least of which is the way the Internet has revolutionized advertising. Yet, the newspaper industry has largely been the author of much, if not most, of it own misfortune. Finally, because of the focus on industrial imperatives, the conversation about the great promise of the new technology in terms of the practice and craft of journalism has been reduced almost to a sideshow, when it could be argued that it should be at the centre of the discussion. Acknowledgements FIRST, I have to thank my thesis advisor, Dr. Christopher Doman, who had to put up with my ramblings and ravings through two theses—a master’s and then a doctoral dissertation. If that’s not effort above and beyond the call of duty, I don’t know what is. I would also like to offer my gratitude to the other two members of my editorial board, Drs. Michel Dorland and Andre Turcotte, who also taught the two sections of the core seminar of the doctoral program the year I entered it. Their teaching had more to do with my continuing in the program than they could know. Thanks also to Drs. Enn Raudsepp and Peter Hodgins for taking time to sit as examiners at my defence. If it had not been for my wife, Diane, I never would have started this journey. Her encouragement and support helped me through when I would have gladly turned to something else, and I am eternally grateful. I also thank my children, Patrick, Connor, Sean and Katie, whose tolerance of my weird hobby was almost as strong as their bemusement. A special thank-you goes to Connor for his patience and effort in getting this massive thing through the printer, twice, and to Katie for delivering it. I’d also like to thank the unsung heroes of the Carleton University School of Journalism and Communication, administrative assistants Frida Ann Choueiri, Carole Craswell, and Coleen Komelson. And finally, though it almost seems redundant considering how ruthlessly I have ransacked their works, I need to say thank-you to the giants upon whose shoulders I have tried to stand. Table of contents Introduction Postmodern times 1 Chapter 1 Language & power 25 Chapter 2 Steel, ink, flesh & money 68 Chapter 3 Cries, criticism, curses & complaints 117 Chapter 4 Dialectic of gloom: business 162 Chapters Dialectic of gloom: technology 213 Chapter 6 Dialectic of gloom: craft 260 Conclusion Post-postmodern times 306 Bibliography 324 In tr o d u c tio n Postmodern times ALTHOUGH I am neither an expert in nor an aficionado of the Frankfurt School, I chose—respectfully and playfully— to name this thesis after Max Horkheimer’s and Theodor Adorno’s Dialectic of Enlightenment for a number of reasons, not the least of which is that it’s a guaranteed attention grabber. My desktop dictionary defines “dialectic” as “the art of investigating or discussing the truth of opinions.” Given the amount of opinion about the newspaper business that has been flowing over the past couple of years, this seems appropriate for an effort to sift through it and make sense of it. Also, the Dialectic of Enlightenment poses the question of whether “enlightenment, in the service of the present, is turning itself into an outright deception of the masses” (2002: 34). That book deals with myth, and how enlightenment has reverted, or been converted, to myth. It asks how it could be that a world so enlightened in science and commerce can be so benighted in ethics, morality, culture and intellectual freedom, and examines how the illusion of intellectual freedom can be employed as a means of enslavement. As we see in the first three chapters of this thesis, these themes play important roles in much media criticism. Also, because it is an exploration of mystification, or gloom, the Dialectic o f Enlightenment is a somewhat ironic title. Here, I hope to produce a discussion about gloom that will be as much an exploration of enlightenment. Finally, even the misuse of the word “dialectic” as referring to “dialect” is useful, because much of what follows deals with a specialized 2 professional culture and its language of despair. ONE OF the more dramatic aspects of the economic crisis that began in 2008 was what amounted to a prolonged and very noisy nervous breakdown on the part of the so-called mainstream media. This has yet to subside, though it has quieted down considerably. Often hyperbolic reportage on and analysis of the business has predicted that major cities would find themselves without newspapers, and that the old “gatekeeper” culture of the mainstream media would be swept aside by a new, free, “citizen” journalism. Readers and viewers were abandoning newspapers and television—or, at least, young desirable ones were—so advertisers were turning away from these “dying” media. At one extreme, observers conjured up visions of a democracy seized by a sudden inability to speak clearly to itself, a civil society transformed into a marketing culture, and a politics of polarization, atomization and alienation. At the other, there were utopian predictions that a wired citizenry would rise up and replace the old media with a new, conversational, fully participatory wiki­ journalism, in which everyone could be reporter, editor and publisher, and information would be collected and shaped by the people who consume it. As one observer pointed out, there is a distinct “Manichean” tone to most of the conversation (Franklin, 2008): print is dead; long live digital media. Yet even a casual examination of the discourse reveals a maze of contradictions, generalizations and highly suspect conclusions. Many of the stories simply outline the financial struggles of several large media companies and apply that information to the newspaper industry at large—and ignore data in other stories, showing smaller 3 newspapers and individual holdings of large media companies turning a profit, and foreign newspaper industries thriving.