Author: Adam Cantwell-Corn, co-founder of The Bristol Cable
Please note the opinions and perspectives here are the authors.
The Bristol Cable is a 100% member-owned newspaper, redefining local media. We produce public interest journalism rooted in local communities.
The Cable was launched in October 2014 by a small team of volunteers. The organisation was largely volunteer-run until April 2016. We now have a team of eight full time equivalent staff spanning editorial, tech, membership, events, administration and management, in addition to dozens of freelancers.
We focus on producing original local features and investigations in a free quarterly print magazine of 30,000 copies, and publish articles, podcasts and videos several times a week online. All of our journalism is free to access.
Our public interest journalism has prompted accountability and change to local government policies, sparked criminal and human rights court cases, and has been cited in parliament several times and regularly in the national media. We are the recipients of the 2019 British Journalism Award for local journalism, longlisted for an Orwell Foundation Prize 2020 and highly commended in the British Journalism Awards 2021.
The Cable’s current 2,800 paying members contribute a minimum of £1 per month, averaging at £3.50. We are incorporated as a not-for-profit Community Benefit Society, meaning that all members are legal and equal shareholders in the organisation.
Members are engaged to help steer the co-operative forward. For example, by voting on editorial campaigns, standing for election to our board of trustees, prioritising our resources or strategic focus, and grappling with key issues facing the organisation. This is delivered through in-person events such as our Annual General Meeting, and the pioneering development and use of digital technology for community participation. This includes the development of a Community Relationship Manager software for newsrooms, in partnership with German not-for-profit investigative publication Correctiv, and the UK-based Bureau of Investigative Journalism.
Alongside journalism and membership engagement, we proactively engage with the wider public through events, our Media Lab community training programmes, and initiatives such as our paid Early Career Journalist scheme.
This community engagement approach is also reflected in our journalism, which seeks to provide a platform for underrepresented voices and groups, as well as ‘solutions journalism’ that unpacks answers to key questions of public concern.
The Cable’s unique business model and approach to local journalism is internationally regarded as a leading example of local journalism innovation. We regularly participate in these forums to advance discussion and action on innovation in journalism.
Our current funding mix is 37% generated revenue (35% is membership, the remainder is print advertising and commissions) and 63% from philanthropic sources, primarily two major USA-based foundations that fund initiatives internationally. All of our financial information is available on our website.
While the Cable is noted as a success story, we face major challenges to achieve financial sustainability and the model, like all others, is far from proven. But, as is sometimes said in this industry, the very act of survival is success in itself. This is particularly the case in local journalism, where limitations on scale due to potential audience or supporter markets are more pertinent.
Though the Cable's approach is distinctive from much of the wider sector, we consider that there is a chronic crisis across the whole of the market - made acute by the pandemic - with deep societal significance.
There has been a market failure to provide a public good, and as such we hope the inquiry will consider initiatives and actions that match the scale and urgency of this challenge.
Partnerships
On multiple occasions we have partnered with the regional BBC to produce major stories. This has enabled us to reach a large audience and demonstrates the possibility of a model that could be better institutionalised: On all occasions the Cable has instigated the relationship with the BBC, but there should be a more proactive approach which would enable the BBC to reach new and diverse audiences while supporting the resources and profile of independent local publishers. A similar relationship could be developed for other PSBs and independent publications.
Local Democracy Reporter scheme
There has been some important journalism produced through the Local Democracy Reporter scheme that otherwise would not be supported by the current market. However, questions remain including:
● How well the journalism has been engaged with by the public: This should not be determined by limited metrics such as page views. But the aims and assumptions of the scheme should be rigorously evaluated to assess whether there are ways to deliver public interest journalism in a more high impact way - for example by improving the ‘editorial product’ in terms of the communications, story development, branding and distribution of the content.
● The distribution of resources: There remains significant controversy regarding the allocation of the vast majority of publicly funded reporters to the conglomerate private companies. This includes cases where shareholders profits have continued while newsroom resources are cut. This is not an acceptable use of public funds and more provision should be made to distribute resources to more diverse and independent publications.
● The long term aim and stimulation of innovation: It is legitimate to have subsidies or
‘props’ for an industry in crisis. But this must also be paired with a push to innovate
solutions that do more than plug a hole. It should work towards a longer term model of
supporting public interest journalism. A central component of this should be the principle that If public money is to be granted to for-profit companies, there must be higher levels of ‘conditionality’ to ensure that the best public value is achieved.
Given that the recommendations have not been adopted, the impact of the review has been only to elevate the prominence of the conversation about the crisis in local journalism. This is an important development, in that it has helped to articulate ways forward, but the impact itself has been limited.
In short, by working to develop a series of short, medium long term policy tools - carrots and sticks - that will stimulate a managed transition away from a failing market structure that is limiting plurality, stifling innovation and promoting an oligopoly of publishers who do not provide consistent quality coverage equivalent to their scale and market dominance.
There has been too heavy a focus on a series of short term projects and limited subsidisation of business models (including initiatives by Facebook and Google) that are fundamentally flawed, in the absence of a rebalancing of power and profit away from the tech platforms. As such, more ambitious reform is needed.
There are a range of variations, but the recommendations in the Cairncross review form a good foundation, particularly:
● A journalism innovation agency: A network integrator and independent administrator of multi-year grants from public funds or from a levy on platforms - that rewards innovation and supports scaleable or replicable models, rather than only plugs holes or props up existing models. In particular a shift should be encouraged towards reader revenue models and new forms of ownership, as a model that can improve sustainability, facilitate public interest journalism and public trust.
As well as the desperate need for core funding, specific projects with the prospect of sector wide impact should be supported. A key example would be the Bristol Cable’s Community Relationship Manager software. Now developed for global release in partnership with the Bureau of Investigative Journalism, Beabee is a pioneering digital tool for managing and engaging an active community of supporters.
Building on best practice from innovation agencies, such an organisation would not only grant funding for both startup and scale up initiatives, but could act as a systems integrator for promoting excellence across a diverse sector.
● A rebalancing of the relationship between publishers and the platforms: this may help make advertising a more viable proposition, thus limiting the business imperatives that drive ‘clickbait’ and ‘churnalism’.
● The lowering of barriers for philanthropic funding to journalism and beneficial tax status: In particular the removal of the barrier of eligible public interest journalism to achieve charitable status. This is an anachronistic cultural and legal obstacle to unlocking funding as well as tax advantages.
In part due to this regulatory issue and the lack of a philanthropic ecosystem for journalism in the UK, The Bristol Cable has relied on USA/International based philanthropy for the majority of our grant funding.
● Training and skills development: University and other training providers could be encouraged to develop a pipeline of skills and talent that better meet the needs of the modern industry and harness emerging tech and best practice. For example, business management for newsrooms, computer programming, product development, and community engagement approaches for journalism as well as editorial training. The higher education sector in the USA is relatively advanced on this.
Given the long standing culture of partisan journalism in the UK, it is not clear what outlets would fall within this category with widespread agreement. The question intersects with age-old debates about the boundaries of objectivity and independence of journalism. Indeed, many of the most prominent news-brands can be readily considered highly partisan, as can other newer publications. On this particular point we would contribute the following:
● Understanding the role of economics and the business model:
A key driving factor for understanding the rise of viral-optimised content, whether partisan or not, is due to the failing economics and model of digital advertising as a way to support journalism. As the platforms and tech giants dominate and extract the lion’s share of commercial value from digital adverts within editorial content, there is an economic imperative to drive virality and scale so that publishers can recoup some meagre revenue. This is not the only factor, and of course cynical sensationalism predates social media and the internet. But the economics of digital advertising has aggressively accelerated and incentivised ‘outrage’ and other viral optimised content; in that it drives clicks and shares more effectively than other forms of journalism, thus driving revenue for the content publishers but predominantly for the tech platforms.
● News avoidance:
The above feeds into a wider concern that is too often overshadowed by concerns about polarisation: The phenomenon of ‘news avoidance’. According to the Reuters Institute of Journalism at the University of Oxford, up to 25% of the UK population consider themselves as ‘news avoiders’ for various reasons. That a major part of the population is withdrawing from consuming news-media, a vital component of civic participation, should give major concern for policy makers and society as whole.
Urgent efforts must be made to shape a market that can support high quality, accurate, accountable and trustworthy journalism. To be clear, we do not consider this should focus on the pursuit of mythical and unattainable standards of objectivity or any state sanctioned regulation of legitimate free speech. However, there should be efforts to strengthen codes of conduct, standards and corporate and professional behaviour, as well as addressing the economic drivers as described above.
● A duty of transparency:
A key component of that may involve encouraging (though not requiring) enhanced and proactive transparency - of ownership, executive employees, funding, editorial policies and advertising practices, including paid for content and corporate partnerships. This will help enhance trust and accountability from audiences and communities. These are building blocks for a positive foundation for improving trust, engagement and ultimately the financial support so desperately needed for the future of journalism.
ENDS