An Audioboo on teaching journalists the rudiments of economics, finance, and perhaps how not to be a sucker when it comes to listening to economists do their thang. Data is the way forward folks.
2 Responses to “Teaching Economics to Journalists”
LorcanRK
08/06/2010 at 5:08 pm
Hi Stephen,
While your idea does make a lot of sense, there is a large problem (with which I am very familiar) in editorial policy at many of the more mainstream publications.
Basically, they do not like data.
Getting a chart published is one of the hardest things to do, and spending a few paragraphs analysising that data is practically unheard of.
The general excuse is that such articles are for publications like the Financial Times, and the fear among editors seems to be that they will alienate their readership by giving them data, no matter how well it is interpreted.
The rule seems to be dumb down. dumb down, and dumb down. And when you are finished dumbing down, dumb down some more.
Polemics are ok, anecdotes are good. Data and trends are verboten.
Journalism is a demand driven market. If a journalist does not produce the goods the editor wants they will find their services in less demand. Likewise, if an editor does not give his/her readership what they want then their position will be called into question.
If the demand existed for journalism on the level you (correctly, imo) wish for, then publications like Business and Finance would not be the niche players that they are.
Hi Lorcan,
Sorry, just saw this comment. Yes, the page space/graph thing is important--but not on blog sites and places where people self publish, esp. things like Storyful, which should take full advantage of the fact that they've *nothing* to do with a traditional print ecosystem. Plus, if you trained journos not to be scared of these things, then they'd be more inclined to include them, too.
Hi Stephen,
While your idea does make a lot of sense, there is a large problem (with which I am very familiar) in editorial policy at many of the more mainstream publications.
Basically, they do not like data.
Getting a chart published is one of the hardest things to do, and spending a few paragraphs analysising that data is practically unheard of.
The general excuse is that such articles are for publications like the Financial Times, and the fear among editors seems to be that they will alienate their readership by giving them data, no matter how well it is interpreted.
The rule seems to be dumb down. dumb down, and dumb down. And when you are finished dumbing down, dumb down some more.
Polemics are ok, anecdotes are good. Data and trends are verboten.
Journalism is a demand driven market. If a journalist does not produce the goods the editor wants they will find their services in less demand. Likewise, if an editor does not give his/her readership what they want then their position will be called into question.
If the demand existed for journalism on the level you (correctly, imo) wish for, then publications like Business and Finance would not be the niche players that they are.
(sorry for the lack of data to back up my point!)
Hi Lorcan,
Sorry, just saw this comment. Yes, the page space/graph thing is important--but not on blog sites and places where people self publish, esp. things like Storyful, which should take full advantage of the fact that they've *nothing* to do with a traditional print ecosystem. Plus, if you trained journos not to be scared of these things, then they'd be more inclined to include them, too.