'The splintering of the fourth estate' and its effects on journalism

This article will consider how the diminution of traditional intermediaries is changing the role of publishing in social life, by analysing journalism in particular, and examine its positive and negative impacts as well as take into consideration the future of publishing.

The fourth estate refers to the eighteenth-century claim that the press was entitled to its own independent standing in the political system, as the “Fourth Estate” (Schultz 1998, p. 15). This term was coined by Edmund Burke during a parliamentary debate in 1787, who used it in reference to the three estates in Parliament: The Lords Spiritual, the Lords Temporal and the Commons (Wikipedia 2014a). Modern news media and those engaged in its production continue to embrace this role, however in recent times this has been challenged (Schultz 1998, p. 15). Schultz (1998) claimed that the Fourth estate role has passed from news media as an institution to journalists, editors and producers. I would argue that at present, this has gone even further, not just passed to journalists, editors and producers and professionals in the media industry but to ordinary people due to the proliferation of distribution via the internet and in particular social media. This is what Alan Rusbridger meant by “the splintering of the fourth estate” (The Guardian 2010).

Photo: Peter Denton

 Rusbridger mentioned how social media, Twitter in particular, has challenged the notions of authority in journalism. Instead of relying on the expert opinion of journalists, Twitter users rely on a “peer to peer” authority. People are more likely to agree with the opinion of someone who share the same values and beliefs as them, perhaps someone from a similar age group. Although it should be pointed out that this does not mean Twitter users completely ignore journalists and news corporations, according to him they have become their most effective distributers and aggregators (The Guardian 2010). However, it can still be argued that we no longer rely on traditional intermediaries for news and opinions and Twitter is the perfect example.

This has changed the role of publishing in social life. In my opinion this has brought about numerous positives. Many events have transpired as a result of this shift in the power of distribution. A perfect example would be the impacts of citizen journalism, which is defined "as an alternative and activist form of newsgathering and reporting that functions outside mainstream media institutions, often as a repose to shortcoming in the professional journalistic field and is driven by different objectives and ideals and relies on alternative sources of legitimacy than traditional or mainstream journalism” (Wikipedia 2014b). In short, it is based on public citizens playing an active role in aggregating and distributing news and information. An example of this would be Wikileaks, which is an international, online, non-profit, journalistic organisation which publishes secret information, news leaks, and classified media from anonymous sources (Wikipedia 2014c). It was through this that events like the Arab Spring was made possible. After the leaking of diplomatic cables that gave evidence of the brutality of the regime in Egypt via Wikileaks, protesters capitalized on the internet and spread this knowledge by using media such as Facebook and Twitter (Mabon 2013, p.1852). The combined effect of Wikileaks and the use of social media to spread eye witness accounts helped protestors to bypass the traditional media institutions and spread the information throughout the world, which increased pressure on the regime and countered the propaganda of the pro-regime media (Mabon 2013, p.1852).

Photo: Mosa'ab Elshamy

More recently, there was a story in the media about how two rival drug cartels in Tamaulipas have final say over what gets printed or broadcast in the local media. This resulted in the people of the state turning to social media to share information about organized crime and its infiltration of the government. This was made possible through a Facebook group - Valor por Tamaulipas (which means Courage for Tamaulipas), the most popular citizen news hub in the state. Dr Fuentes Rubio was an administrator for the page and her Twitter account was also used to share information about possible shootouts within the heavy gang and drug cartel community (DailyMail 2014). This is another fine example of citizen journalism making an impact by bypassing the traditional gatekeepers, who at times may be corrupt or biased. Unfortunately, Dr Rubio was killed by the cartel but we can say without hesitation that she made an impact by spreading awareness not only in her city but worldwide. This would not have been possible had the power of traditional intermediaries, in this case the biased local media, not been diminished by our ability to communicate with each other without going through them.  

It is interesting to note that the impacts even extend to journalists themselves, who are supposedly part of the ‘fourth estate’. According to Rusbridger many of the best reporters are now using Twitter as an aid to finding information. This may be simple requests for knowledge that other people already know, have to hand, or can easily find. “The so-called wisdom of crowds comes into play: the ‘they know more than we do’ theory”. It could also be journalists using Twitter to find witnesses to specific events (The Guardian 2010). Journalists themselves are relying on the opinions of citizens through social media. This is a perfect example of the splintering of the fourth estate and how publishing is changing. I will not disagree with the fact that this is truly transformative and has many positives, but I do have some issues to raise with what is happening.

Rusbridger gave an example of how it’s a fantastic form of distribution and marketing. He said, “I only have 18,500 followers. But if I get retweeted by one of our columnists, Charlie Brooker, I reach a further 200,000. If Guardian Technology picks it up it goes to an audience of 1.6 million. If Stephen Fry notices it, it's global.” (The Guardian 2010). This is all well and good, but what dictates the power of one’s distribution? Why does it get global when Stephen Fry notices it and not when Charlie Brooker retweets it? It may bypass traditional gatekeepers, but in my opinion this comes with its own pitfalls. It seems to put power in the hands of celebrities, or ‘experts’ in a particular area. They can aggregate, curate and disseminate news of their choosing. It may not mean that we have to listen to them but it is without a doubt that their opinions will be distributed to a much wider audience. Is that better than having the press as an institution, especially if many people affiliate with the person? Can we allow the opinion of one person to dictate how we feel? What happens if someone pays Julian Assange (the founder of Wikileaks) a billion dollars to leak fake news?

A perfect example is how Brazilian football player Neymar recently posted a video to his Facebook page declaring his support for Presidential candidate Aécio Neves in the recent Brazilian election. He has 48,824,028 likes on Facebook which means this post reached that amount of people (Facebook 2014). That is an astonishing amount of people. While I may not listen to a footballer’s political opinion, what about those who are poorly educated and idolise him? What about those who affiliate with him as a person? It is safe to say that football is a huge sport in Brazil and he is a hero to many. He may feel justified in his opinion, but this opinion may not be based on a balanced argument nor result in an outcome that is beneficial for all, perhaps just for him. I’m not saying he is doing this but I am pointing out that this is possible. This is one of the reasons why I feel bypassing traditional gatekeepers brings about its own problems.

Photo: Ry

 Let’s move on to the ‘experts’. Prominent bloggers often make their living by getting paid for advertisements. An example would be PayPerPost, one of several services that introduce companies to bloggers willing to write nice things about their products for a fee (Trilling 2006, p.26). Prominent bloggers would have more influence over our opinions than just a regular person. Since these very bloggers are being targeted by advertisers, how can we trust their opinion? The issue here is credibility. An example of the potential risks of the lack of credibility would a Facebook page that reports news events in Mount Gambier, in South Australia. This is run solely by one person, 25 year old Josh Lynagh. There are 8,300 people following his page, a third of Mount Gambier’s population, compared to the local newspaper The Border Watch that has 4,500 followers and ABC South East South Australia has just over 2,000. While he has received a lot of positive feedback for keeping the community in the loop, I feel that there are risks involved in citizen journalism.

According to Dr Vincent O’Donnell, a media commentator from the Royal Melbourne Institute of Technology, the page “has the presentation of a legitimate news site, but was presenting gossip, not news.”

"It's a bit like sitting in a town square on market day and all the old gossips are there competing to tell stories - a lot of the new media are like that."

He goes on to say that the danger of such social media pages is that there is no way for the reader to cross-check for unsubstantiated information and that too many of these sites put too high a value on being first with a story rather than being correct with the story (ABC 2014). This example shows how citizen journalism may not have the credibility of traditional media, which is another issue brought about by the “splintering of the fourth estate”.

But this raises a more important question, does this not mean that in order for a journalist or news article to be taken seriously, it has to pass through the traditional gatekeepers?  If that is the case, then maybe we cannot say that it has truly been transformative since news still has to pass through traditional intermediaries to be taken seriously. However, I feel that citizen journalism at least brings some issues to light that the traditional media might miss, but perhaps the responsibility of spreading this news to a wider audience and providing credibility still lies with the traditional gatekeepers. Going back to the story of Dr Rubio and the Mexican cartel, if it was not reported by major news agencies, I doubt any of us would have heard of it. However, this is where my argument about the issue of credibility reaches its limit. To take it further it would require substantial data, how much more credible do we find traditional intermediaries compared to new forms of media - and does a story have to pass through a traditional intermediary to gain traction and credibility? A news story may stem from a citizen journalist, but will the mass public hear about it or believe it without it being disseminated by the traditional media?

Another issue I have to raise is that the potential problems do not stop with just celebrities or ‘experts’, the internet and social media allows political parties to directly inform citizens, bypassing the fourth estate (Weaver et al., 2007, cited in Vergeer  2012,  p.10). It is easier for politicians to influence citizens without the press critiquing and mediating on behalf of the public.

Looking towards the future, there is also the concern about maintaining net neutrality. Net neutrality assures equal access for users and service providers by imposing rules on those who own the infrastructure, preventing them from discriminating in throttling back the bit rates of services flowing through their network (Gargano 2011, p.74).  Net neutrality is needed in order for “the splintering of the fourth estate” to bring about positives such as citizen journalism. We have to maintain net neutrality or there will no longer be an equal voice and being able to bypass traditional intermediaries might actually bring about more negatives than positives as certain people or organisations might have a monopoly on disseminating information, but this time there will be nobody to mediate what is said due to the bypassing of these intermediaries. There has been extensive debate about whether net neutrality should be required by law, particularly in the United States. If these internet service providers win the battle against net neutrality, then certain companies and people will have a monopoly over the web, and this is indeed scary. Would citizen journalists and the general public be able to voice their concerns if the internet is controlled by a handful of people? Advocates warn that by charging every Web site, from the smallest blogger to Google, network owners may be able to block competitor Web sites and services, as well as refuse access to those unable to pay (Wikipedia 2014d). What happens if companies, famous bloggers, celebrities, politicians and the like have unequal access to the web and stifle the opinions of others? Will only a handful of people be dictating our opinion and sentiment?

Photo: Bryan Moore

It is evident that while “the splintering of the fourth estate” and the new-found ability of regular people to aggregate and distribute information has been transformative and has brought above many positives, there are many questions and issued to be considered such as those I have raised in this article.  

REFERENCES

ABC 2014, The rise and fall of citizen journalism, ABC South East SA, accessed 2 November 2014, <http://www.abc.net.au/local/stories/2014/05/14/4004510.htm>.

Daily Mail 2014, 'Today my life comes to an end': Mexican drug cartel tracks down crusading citizen journalist and slays her - then uses her own Twitter account to boast about it, Daily Mail, accessed 1 November 2014, <http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2804371/Today-life-comes-end-Mexican-drug-cartel-tracks-crusading-citizen-journalist-slays-using-Twitter-account-announce-death.html>.

Facebook 2014, neymarjr, Facebook, accessed 2 November 2014, <https://www.facebook.com/neymarjr>

Gargano, A. R. 2011, “Net Neutrality”, Broadcast Engineering, vol.53, no. 2.

Schultz, J. 1998, Reviving the fourth estate : democracy, accountability and the media, Cambridge, Melbourne.

Trilling, D. 2006, 'FIVE WAYS COMPANIES CAN USE THE INTERNET TO TARGET YOUR WALLET', New Statesman, vol. 135, no. 4807, p. 26.

The Guardian 2010, The splintering of the fourth estate, The Guardian, accessed November 1 2014, <http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2010/nov/19/open-collaborative-future-journalism>.

Vergeer, M. 2012, ‘Politics, elections and online campaigning: Past, present . . . and a peek into the future’, New media & Society, vol.15, no.1, pp. 9–17.

Wikipedia 2014a, Fourth Estate, Wikipedia, accessed 1 November 2014, <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fourth_Estate#cite_note-OED6a-4>.

Wikipedia 2014b, Citizen journalism, Wikipedia, accessed 1 November 2014, <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Citizen_journalism>.

Wikipedia 2014c, WikiLeaks, Wikipedia, accessed 1 November 2014, <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/WikiLeaks>.

Wikipedia 2014d, Net neutrality, Wikipedia, accessed 2 November 2014, <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Net_neutrality>.

PHOTO CREDITS

Denton, P. 2014, accessed 6 November 2014, <a href="https://www.flickr.com/photos/peterdenton/4319985577/">Peter Denton</a> via <a href="http://photopin.com">photopin</a> <a href="http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/2.0/">cc</a>.

Elshamy, M. 2014, accessed 6 November 2014, <a href="https://www.flickr.com/photos/mosaaberising/6950520864/">Mosa'aberising</a> via <a href="http://photopin.com">photopin</a> <a href="http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-sa/2.0/">cc</a>.

Ry., 2014, accessed 6 November 2014, <a href="https://www.flickr.com/photos/drl/14324642660/">drl.</a> via <a href="http://photopin.com">photopin</a> <a href="http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-sa/2.0/">cc</a>.

Moore, B. 2014, accessed 6 November 2014, <a href="https://www.flickr.com/photos/doctabu/3659665238/">Brian Lane Winfield Moore</a> via <a href="http://photopin.com">photopin</a> <a href="http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-sa/2.0/">cc</a>.