by clicking the arrows at the side of the page, or by using the toolbar.
by clicking anywhere on the page.
by dragging the page around when zoomed in.
by clicking anywhere on the page when zoomed in.
web sites or send emails by clicking on hyperlinks.
Email this page to a friend
Search this issue
Index - jump to page or section
Archive - view past issues
Panpa Bulletin : July 2011
Opinion www.panpa.org.au | JULY 2011 | The PANPA Bulletin Train, or miss the boat WHAT do lawyers, accountants and real estate agents all do that journal- ists do not? This is not a “three guys walk into a bar” joke but an observa- tion of professional behaviours the first three exhibit and journalists ignore. It’s professional development training. To receive the right to hang up your shingle claiming you are a lawyer, accountant or real estate agent (yep, even real estate!), you must commit to a minimum number of hours dedicated to keeping your professional knowledge current. Lawyers must undergo 10 hours a year, accountants must do 120 hours every three years with a minimum of 20 hours annually, and real estate agents need to prove they have 12 “points” a year – the time each point takes to earn depends on the quality of the training. Sure, they can resist, go sullenly and refuse to learn anything. Good operators embrace it, using the obligation as an excuse to attend conferences, get up to speed on new legislation or technology, take a step outside their day-to-day work and learn something that will expand their knowledge and help them take a fresh approach. Why don’t journalists have this requirement? Some of the reasoning is historical. It’s only in the past 20 years that we’ve become a “quasi-profession”, with people now going for a univer- sity degree as a stepping stone to enter our ranks. Most of us are still products of cadetships and on-the-job training from the days when the industry was seen as proudly blue collar. And many of us still have the scars of the so-called “training” that did exist, so why on earth would we want to do more? Traditionally, we have relied on our union to negotiate our training. Traditionally, we have expected training to be something that man- agement offers us, or that we are selected for. Traditionally, we have felt that if the company or industry is really going in that direction, they can put their hands in their pockets and get us sorted. But this approach hardly serves us in an era of constantly changing technology, new methods of story- telling and hungry new audiences that we cannot serve because we can’t move fast enough. At a time when society’s consump- tion of media has never been higher, it is enormously sad, on so many levels, that Fairfax is outsourcing 82 sub-editor and designer roles. I understand that in a modern newsroom, there is a need to do things differently. I understand that outsourcing is easier to manage than leading cultural change. But at a time when newsroom roles are being redefined, when we are struggling to get the tone right across mobile, iPad, online, video and print; and when “commission- ing once but publishing many” is the mantra, Fairfax’s message to longstanding journalists is “there’s nothing here for you”. And whose fault is that? If every journalist was required to undertake say 16 hours of profes- sional development training in order to carry a media pass, wouldn’t all publishers be in a better position to handle the transformation of our businesses? Wouldn’t we now have a vast resource of multi-talented journalists who are savvy in new-media think- ing as we embark boldly into future ventures? Who would pay for the training? Well, lawyers, accountants and real estate agents mix it up between employer-funded and self-funded training. Many fast track their careers by paying for their own training and claiming it back on tax in the hope of a quicker promotion or new role. Others choose not to do it at all, or drag their feet. In worst-case scenarios, their right to practice is removed from them, or they are the first on the chopping block when the restructure comes. In modern business, individuals are taking responsibility for their own training and the value they bring to their employer. Journalists need to honestly reassess their own position in a fast- changing industry. Technology is giving us incredibly exciting new ways to tell stories and capture new audiences. Successful journalists are those with talent not just in the art of jour- nalism but in the art of producing content for multiple platforms, thus maximising their audience. A colleague who has been on a subs’ desk needs to adjust to the fact that editorial production now includes HTML5, video-editing on programs such as Final Cut Pro and goodness knows what else today and into the future. These skills now complement the art forms of journalism, such as injecting tonality, wit and wisdom into our work. A combination of the skills is now an essential marriage. If you believe the capacity to file tight intros, write good headlines and know an editorial system inside out is sufficient, then sadly you are fool- ing yourself about what lies ahead. It is time to learn from lawyers and other professions. It is time to invest in yourself and create a new stage in your career in this fast-evolving world. But if you don’t, good luck anyway. Kylie Davis is the national real estate editor at News Ltd and former owner, publisher and “entreprenette”at The Village Voice newspapers Kylie Davis Shape up: Sandy MacLeod of the Toronto Star talks colleagues through digital development at the 2010 PANPA Future Forum