Communiqué 30: Journalism in the creator economy

Realising that journalists are creators changes how we think about the news business.

Presented by Fincra

With Fincra’s customisable APIs, developers can build quick financial applications; online platforms and fintechs can integrate seamless payment flows into their web and mobile applications with complete SDKs. 

Fincra has designed its API infrastructure for developers that build platforms that send and receive frequent payments and require flexibility.

Ready to build the payment solutions?

---

Journalism in the creator economy

Credit: lemono

I spend a lot of time thinking about journalism's evolution, particularly how it has changed economically over the years. I left the profession in 2019 but still care deeply about it. I recognise how much we need good journalism, how much we need good journalism to be sustainable, and how much we need journalists to be able to enjoy the financial rewards of their work.

It’s a big problem when journalists can’t make a good living from the work they do. That introduces new layers of complexity that have serious consequences for society. If we can’t trust that journalists will produce great work and be able to sustain themselves on the proceeds of that work, then we’re in trouble.

Many of my thoughts on this topic are products of a conversation with Laura Oliver for her piece for the Reuters Institute for the Study of Journalism. It explores the pros and cons of working as a solo journalist in an emerging market. Taking a global view, it examines examples from Latin America, Africa, and Asia. It also considers journalism within the creator economy.

Oliver writes:

“Estimates for the market value of the creator economy, an industry consisting of millions of bloggers, videographers, social media influencers and digital content creators, run as high as $104.2 billion… Journalists running and monetising their own output are part of this industry. While the term creator might suggest fabrication rather than rigorous reporting, what journalists share with their fellow creators are the challenges of going it alone: becoming entrepreneurial, delivering your own product and making the business work.”

When we think about journalism, we often don’t consider it a part of the creator economy, which has commercial undertones. Journalism is primarily considered a public service. It’s as much for the good of the masses as it is for-profit, maybe even more.

Journalists also don’t like to think of themselves as content creators, but they are. Every piece of journalism feeds into the global content ecosystem, whether online or offline. Every news story, feature article, analysis, etc., is content. We just consume and interact with them differently.

The harsh reality for journalists

Credit: bobmadbob

For many years, journalists have played second (or third) fiddle to the sales and business people who sell ads and subscriptions. The journalists often put their lives on the line to gather sources and break stories but somehow end up with the short end of the revenue stick.

Analysing the US job market in 2014, researcher Alex T. Williams wrote that in comparison to Public Relations, “journalists earned significantly less ($35,600 versus $54,940)” and that the salaries of journalists didn’t keep up with inflation in the ten years preceding his research.

In the UK, research conducted in the early 2010s showed that one in four journalists earned less than £20,000 a year. One journalist, Jim Oldfield, revealed that he earned just £25,500 despite having worked for 37 years.

In 2020, I wrote about the cost of good journalism in Nigeria and highlighted the feeble economics of the business:

“Nigeria is far from being an ideal market. Here, the relationship between advertisers and journalists is skewed in favour of the advertisers, the market for journalism doesn’t seem to have grown much over the past decade or two, Nigeria’s economy is anything but great, and, to a large extent, proximity to political power influences business and economic success.”

Why do journalists traditionally earn poorly?

There are two ways to answer this question. First, you have people who argue that journalists earn poorly because their content does not offer as much commercial value as others in the same value chain. The thinking is that once a news story breaks, it loses its commercial appeal. Media and tech analyst Ben Thompson puts it this way, “News, the moment it is reported, immediately loses all economic value as it is reproduced and distributed for free, instantly.”

A better way to say this is that journalists who earn poorly do so because their work is highly fungible. 

Some others argue that journalists earn poorly because they haven’t paid enough attention to their industry's economic realities and evolution. Once upon a time, journalism was in its golden age, a time when it attracted massive investments, attention, and cash flow. The traditional news media had a near-monopoly on people’s attention, and advertisers recognised that. However, the times have changed, and the power to command attention and influence behaviour is now concentrated in the hands of a new set of actors – Big Tech companies. So, journalism is a smaller pond, and journalists must flow in this new reality.

What’s the creator economy got to do with this?

That journalism used to be or is a certain way is no guarantee that it will always be that way. In today’s world, the reality is that anyone with a platform can call themselves or be called a journalist. This has impacted how people perceive the profession and what success looks like.

In Nigeria, for example, one of the most influential reporters publishes his hardest-hitting piece on Substack. In football, the most impactful reporter is a 29-year-old freelance journalist who breaks most of his stories on Twitter and his podcast. There is an entire conversation about “influencer journalists” and their impact on the future of journalism.

In the past, to make it as a journalist, you needed to attach yourself to an established news organisation. Today, that isn’t necessary.

In the past, it was inconceivable to refer to a journalist as a creator or influencer. Today, not so much. The tools of the trade, the rules of engagement, and the principles of monetisation are the same.

Let's be clear. This doesn’t apply to all forms of journalism and journalists, but it is increasingly becoming obvious. It’s why even in developed markets, you find that journalists create across the entire content ecosystem. A single journalist can be a writer-reporter, podcaster, and video creator. They can do this for the platforms they work for as much as they can do it for themselves.

What are the implications?

Credit: bobmadbob

In the past, journalists had to depend on corporations for employment and career opportunities. Today, they can set out on their own. This comes with its own challenges, such as support structure and editorial assistance, but these are bugs that technology can fix.

In the past, journalists had little to no equity, taking most of the risk and getting very little in return. Today, technology has so advanced and become ubiquitous that content is increasingly becoming the primary differentiator for any platform. This implies that the platforms that can attract the best and most influential journalists have the upper hand. Now, more than ever, journalists can command the economic value they deserve. But they first need to realise this. Then they need to understand the factors that make it possible.

How to stand out in the creator economy: Journalism edition

The journalists who stand out are both aware of their editorial commitments and the economic dynamism of their industry. They know how to report and analyse stories just as well as they understand the commercial demands of the business.

They know that institutional journalism is no longer what it used to be and that the evolution of digital technology and social media has introduced new layers of complexity. They know that a solo sports journalist with a highly-engaging Twitter account, massive Twitch streaming numbers, and a cult following of transfer news-hungry football fans can be just as impactful (if not more) than whatever Sky Sports is with just a fraction of the cost.

For journalism to thrive, we need more journalists who are actively thinking like business people while doing their jobs and more who deeply understand how technology has impacted and will continue to impact their industry.

Journalism — like the creator economy — is a business, every business involves transactions, and transactions require value exchange. The same way society asks creators what their content is worth, it now asks journalists the same. What's your reply?