Journalist proposes tax to fund content.
An article by journalist Luciano Suassuna exposes the dilemma of print media; advertising has become fragmented and it is no longer possible to control content; the model he proposes envisions a fee to be paid by broadband users, who consume news online; resources would be managed by a fund and distributed based on criteria such as journalistic relevance and content production; "with more actors and more competition, society gains in oversight and democracy is reinvigorated," he says.
247 - Journalist Luciano Suassuna, who has worked for important news outlets such as Istoé, Estado de S. Paulo, and Zero Hora, proposes a new model for financing the production of journalistic content. It wouldn't come from advertising, but from a fund financed by broadband subscribers. Read below:
Should you have to pay to read news online?
Luciano Suassuna
The internet has devalued advertising while simultaneously offering free information, jeopardizing the business model that sustained the communications industry for over a century.
The triad that finances newsrooms (original information, paid circulation, and advertising) has lost value in print, but it has also not reached its equilibrium point online.
If newspapers had the same share of the advertising pie as they did ten years ago, they would have ended 2013 with double the revenue.
This money not only shifted platforms, but was also spread across the abundance of pages, tools, and content on the internet. Creation and replication are paid for as if they were the same. To reach the same number of readers, an advertiser may spend 5% to 20% of what they would spend in newspapers and magazines in the digital realm. At the current price, the most-read political column doesn't have enough clicks to pay a single reporter.
The conclusion is clear: in the short term, news companies risk having their financial viability compromised, and without it, a fundamental part of the press as a watchdog of society will be lost. That is why the discussion about the future of newsrooms needs to be institutional. Compromising independent oversight of governments and companies is to accept the weakening of democracy.
Many will say that, in the digital universe, citizen journalism exists that can fulfill this role. It is true that Mídia Ninja and other initiatives occupy a new space. But the strength of major news outlets, with their culture of journalistic technique, their leverage for reach, and their legal backing, is a value of democracies and, as such, should not be lost in the transition to digital.
Brazil has over 100 million broadband users, and it is estimated that more than 20% of them access news more than once a day. The vast majority visit a news website or blog every three days, and almost all read at least one news article per month. How would it be possible to compensate those who produce this content?
For advertising purposes, especially official advertising, a legal characterization of national content production would help to promote the separation between those who produce and those who replicate, between news reporting and other content (such as song lyrics or photos of friends), and between journalism and marketing tools. But the main debate is whether society believes in the democratic value of a free press enough to finance it.
Just as a mathematical exercise: for R$3 a month, the price of a newspaper copy, it would be possible to create, from micro-subscriptions by broadband users and data plans, a fund comparable to advertising investment in newspapers. This fund would have to be managed by a self-regulatory body, similar to CONAR (Brazilian Advertising Self-Regulation Council).
He should hire an independent auditing firm to determine the revenue distribution. The division would need to take into account audience size, production volume, and journalistic relevance. The weighting and content of these categories would be defined by the agency.
The fund would have to be temporary and limited to financing investment in the transition to digital journalism. And it would be open not only to print publications, but also to media outlets created in the digital environment.
Traditional companies would regain predictable revenue, while new digital players would reduce their dependence on investors and sponsorships. Competition would be incentivized, as greater audience reach and relevance would result in larger revenue shares. In the battle for audience share, it would be reasonable to expect a shift in journalistic language, with more videos, infographics, and solutions that cater to smartphone reading. This structure would maintain the independence of publications and strengthen the diversification of approaches and themes.
With more actors and more competition, society gains in vigilance and democracy is reinvigorated. Is it worth the price?