Sarah Avery
Cash For Comment explores the relationships between journalists, their sources, and the news. Paradoxes operate throughout. Johnson details the contradiction of the watchdog barking at what is effectively its own reflection.
With an intention to express opinions on "where and how quality journalism doesn’t [sic] live up to the expectations of its audience," 1 Johnson uses the coverage of the Australian Broadcasting Authority (ABA) Inquiry into the "cash for comment" scandal and associated events to expose the tension between quality reporting and journalistic culture. With information from journalists involved Johnson subjects the practices of the quality media to the scrutiny of its audience.2
Using the method of paralleling John Laws’ and Alan Jones’ activities with the quality media’s everyday behaviour,3 Johnson explores whether media culture prevents the achievement of balanced and quality reporting. His central arguments are that the media culture is nostalgic and faces commercial pressures, which encourage a dangerous dependence on public relations.4 This, he argues, leads journalists to report with bias and to report trivialities that are not news.
Johnson argues that nostalgia for access leads to poor quality journalism. Experience as a journalist nurtured his belief that journalistic culture is nostalgic for a past which may not have existed as nostalgic journalists recall it – a period where the media had "access" to the subjects of their stories, for example, acquaintances with prominent politicians.5
As he does not believe that journalists’ recollection of the past depicts reality, Johnson does not critique the experiences coveted by the nostalgics.6 Derek Parker, however, critiques the media’s coverage of the Hawke Government, maintaining that the Government received favourable coverage because journalists’ opinions could be manipulated towards the government viewpoint when provided with access. Parker describes an arrangement where non-party spokespersons for interest groups involved in policy-making praised the government. Their opinions were viewed as credible because of their "independence."7 Favourable, "independent" assessment of the government led to favourable reporting. Johnson and Parker do agree, however on the prevalence of press releases.8 Johnson argues that nostalgia leads journalists to court their sources, hoping to gain a portion of the access of the "past."9
Johnson examines the concept of unconscious bias, mirroring the ABA Inquiry. He questions how the desire to appease contacts affects the media – does journalists’ indebtedness to sources lead to their protection?10 David Salter, former Media Watch producer, asked, "to what extent do journalists become captives of their sources?"11 Johnson asks the same question, paralleling the tension between retaining contacts, and quality reporting particularly with Laws’ contract with the Australian Bankers’ Association. The Inquiry revealed that prior to this sponsorship, Laws had an endorsement contract with RAMS Home Loans and frequently criticised banks.12 Laws’ sponsors revealed their hope that payment would influence Laws’ opinion, but Laws asserted that education about banks and not the $500 000 paid for his endorsement changed his evaluation.13 Johnson, as the Inquiry considered regarding Laws, questions whether journalists become unconsciously biased towards their sources because of their beneficial relationship. Through this parallel, journalistic ethics and the hypocrisy of the media’s ABA Inquiry coverage are placed before their audience to be judged.
Johnson also argues that commercial pressures encourage media reliance on press releases14 and that the resultant reports are susceptible to influence and may recount trivialities. Quality journalism is expensive.15 For this reason, Johnson asserts, newspapers especially have sections including travel and beauty, which generate advertising revenue.16 He exposes more ethically questionable media practices, recounting that companies, products and destinations profiled provide some of the information in these sections,17 and that journalists often accept gifts from those profiled.18
According to Johnson many journalists use public relations materials.19 Rodney Smith asserts that press releases require "little adaptation by journalists before [they] can be run as a news story."20 As journalists receive gifts from companies profiled, such as United States holidays for education about Apple computers,21 Johnson contends that it is foreseeable that journalists will report favourably upon these companies.22 Journalists admit to receiving gratuities23 and this relationship is parallelled with the commercial relationship between Laws and Jones and their sponsors.24 Characterising this potential bias with "his bread I eat, his song I sing,"25 Johnson asserts that as a result of audience lack of knowledge about journalistic culture – where press releases and rewards are obtained from those profiled, the audience is unaware of the bias in editorial comment.26 Johnson exposes this culture to the quality media’s audience, and advertises that within the output of any journalist who accepts gratuities, there is potentially bias, and that reports may contain material, provided by marketing companies, which is certainly biased.
The need for cost-effective news also leads to reporting of events that are unimportant and merely provide publicity for persons, events or companies. Johnson uses the annual coverage of the Cointreau Ball as an example of a trivial story, asserting that while the Ball is not news, it is covered because numerous journalists are invited and given "access" to celebrities and socialites.27 Journalists are "educated" by Cointreau public relations personnel so that the Ball, and hence the product it promotes are more likely to receive positive publicity.28 Manipulation of the media is evident annually in the Cointreau trivial story.
Using the examples of Laws and the sections, Johnson shows that individuals and groups attempt to manipulate the media for personal gain. Even public interest stories can result from vested interests, Johnson recounts. The Media Watch story that revealed the "cash for comment" scandal resulted from a leak.29 Johnson’s arguments lead the reader to ask which vested interests prompt leaks to occur, and whether the media should consider this before following them up.
Johnson achieves his objectives. He explores quality journalism and expresses opinions upon journalistic culture and output. Moreover, other authors support his opinions, as do publicly available materials, including the ABA Inquiry transcripts and press articles on the Cointreau Ball, thus the reader finds them credible. The result is that the audience of the quality media finds that the media is encouraged by its culture to produce material that may be influenced by vested interests, contrary to the popular image of the quality media as a watchdog checking powerful individuals and groups by seeking out and reporting the truth as closely as possible.30
Johnson portrays media acceptance of using public relations as a valid means of building stories as a form of journalistic "cash for comment." He makes transparent the paradox and deficiency of a media culture that sees itself as a watchdog but acts in the same way as those it exposes.
Bibliography
Carolyn Batt, Cash-for-comment scandal behind us: ABA (The Age website) http://www.theage.com.au/business/2001/01/17/FFXBXT6G01C.html
Rob Johnson, Cash For Comment: The Seduction of Journo Culture (Sydney: Pluto Press Australia, 2000)
Derek Parker, The Courtesans: The Press Gallery in the Hawke Era. (Sydney: Allen and Unwin, 1991)
Rodney Smith, "The News Media" Politics in Australia, 3rd edition. Rodney Smith (ed). (St Leonards: Allen and Unwin, 1997)
The Cash-for-comment inquiry (Sydney Morning Herald website) http://www.smh.com.au/news/specials/local/laws/index.html
The cash-for-comment inquiry (The Age website) http://www.theage.com.au/special/laws/
Notes
1 Rob Johnson, Cash For Comment: The Seduction of Journo Culture (Sydney: Pluto Press Australia, 2000) ix.
2 Johnson defines quality journalism and its audience; quality journalism is "addressed to an upper-middle class, white collar audience; has influence over a significant number of those people’s opinions;...is credible to them;...tells the truth; and...does not appear to be cost effective to produce." Ibid. 251.
3 According to Johnson the quality media includes the Australian, ABC Radio, Australian Financial Review, the Sydney Morning Herald, Four Corners, and the Age. Ibid. 1 (see also 3, 251).
4 Ibid. 30-31 (see also 112, 214).
5 Rob Johnson. op cit. 191.
6 Ibid. 192.
7 Derek Parker, The Courtesans: The Press Gallery in the Hawke Era. (Sydney: Allen and Unwin, 1991) 49.
8 Ibid. 50.
9 Rob Johnson. op cit. 192.
10 Rob Johnson. op cit. 193.
11 Ibid. 249.
12 Ibid. 124.
13 Ibid. 125.
14 Ibid. 112-13.
15 Ibid. 251.
16 Ibid. 57.
17 Rob Johnson. op cit. 113.
18 Ibid. 57.
19 Ibid. 112.
20 Rodney Smith, "The News Media" Politics in Australia, 3rd edition. Rodney Smith (ed). (St Leonards: Allen and Unwin, 1997) 347.
21 Rob Johnson. op cit. 57.
22 Ibid. 58.
23 Ibid. 61.
24 Ibid. 58 (see also 61).
25 Ibid. 74.
26 Ibid. 199.
27 Rob Johnson. op cit. 41-2.
28 Ibid. 41.
29 Ibid. 30.
30 Ibid. 247.