Donaldson Tan
The author is the Editor of New Asia Republic, a group blog that provides commentaries on science, society, management and the political economy, encompassing the liberal-libertarian spectrum.
Recently, I was told to observe certain boundaries to maintain my objectivity as a blogger. Naturally, I was enraged because I don’t believe in objectivity, and for that matter, partisan neutrality as well.
Sure, there is a lot of hype on how New Media (NM) imposes competitive pressure on the Mainstream Media (MSM) to be more objective and partisan-neutral by simply being an alternative source of information, but we must not conflate NM and MSM as if they share the same objectives in the first place.
Being profit-driven, competition makes MSM more sensitive to readers’ expectations. If readers’ expectations tend towards objective and partisan-neutral reporting, then naturally MSM has to align itself to these expectations in order to recapture audiences and to regain trust from its readers. This is true for both print-based and digital MSM entities.
Yet there is no homogeneity among readers’ expectations. If not, there is no room for tabloids such as Xin Min and The New Paper. The fact is sensationalism sells. Pandering to sensationalism is also considered as aligning to readers’ expectation. Clearly, objectivity and neutrality are not the holy grail but rather means of targeting a particular segment of readers.
So what is objectivity and partisan-neutrality? Do they apply to NM as well? Sociologist Michael Schudson of Columbia University’s School of Journalism defines objectivity as the “faith in ‘facts,’ a distrust in ‘values,’ and a commitment to their segregation.” On the other hand, partisan-neutrality calls for non-biased factual reporting about political parties in terms of scope, depth and frequency.
As argued in previous paragraphs, the application of objectivity and partisan-neutrality is for targeting of a particular segment of readers. Therefore, objectivity and partisan-neutrality are not universal qualities that are applicable to MSM and NM. The qualities a media entity would adopt are the ones that are relevant to its targeted segment of readers.
New Asia Republic (NAR) is an example of a NM entity. It is a group blog that provides commentaries on science, society, management and the political economy, encompassing the liberal-libertarian spectrum. As editor, I can tell you confidently that the targeted reader segments are liberal and libertarian factions based overseas and in Singapore.
As such, NAR has a mixed ideological flavour which is not divorced from the liberal and libertarian value systems and time to time our writers exhibit sympathy towards liberal and libertarian political parties. Lacking a profit incentive, our motivation is guided by our collective values rather than the vulnerability to readers’ expectations. Unless our values resonate with the reader, he would not be subscribing to our content too. No coercion or peer pressure is at play here.
It is not hard to see that the effect of competition between MSM and NM are asymmetrical on the 2 different genres of media. This is due to difference in objectives and targeting of reader segment. More competition between MSM and NM would not lead to widespread adoption of objectivity and partisan-neutrality but rather a higher degree of product differentiation in the media landscape.
As more and more NM entities emerge to cater to a variety of value systems, it is increasingly difficult for MSM to deny acknowledgement that there is diversity in readers’ preferences. Given the profit incentive of MSM, the convergence of MSM and NM is inevitable. After all, NM is ahead in establishing reader base for new niches and in order for MSM to quickly gain new ground, MSM would acquire some NM entities.
Does anyone still remember SPH’s spectacular purchase of Hardware Zone at S$7.1M in 2006?
Actually, the purpose of maintaining objectivity and neutrality is not so much to target a specific segment of readers – that is far too uncaring – than to maintain a core of journalistic ethics.
There is a worrying element about the factionalism that the NM brings. One might call this factionalism “diversity”, but that would hide the real problems underlying this diversity. It is true – there is no coercion or peer pressure for people who choose not to sign up to the blog; but there is that once the person actually subscribes. That is true for both liberal-libertarian NM and conservative-communitarian NM. Henceforth, blog comment threads tend to attract flame wars.
The upshot is that the more “targeted” the NM is, the lower the quality of its analysis of opposing views, since, in the opinion of the members of that particular NM community, opposing views need not be heard, let alone given proper platform for discussion. By becoming too targeted, each NM platform isolates itself from other NM platforms, and becomes a supplement, as opposed to an alternative, to MSM.
The exact problem of NM is that it acquires new niches in reader base, at the expense of streamlining these niches. Instead of promoting social unity, NM ends up promoting social segregation online.
Same for MSM. Just because Sensationalism sells, doesn’t mean that sensationalism is good. MSM which use too much sensationalism lose readers to the NM, because sensationalism crowds out the variety of information possible by excessively focusing/targeting on one form.
Promoting partisan-neutrality and objectivity is not, and should not be, for the profit-motive. It should be in order to promote social cohesion in cyberspace or offline.
The danger of your market-targeting approach, Donaldson, is that it results in a growth of navel-gazers in society, and that is hardly healthy.
It is not readers’ expectations which should be the focus, but genuine social-communal welfare. Otherwise we are doomed to die as a society.
HI Raphael,
In general, New Asia Republic is orientated towards freedom. However, liberalism and libertarianism are two opposing perspectives on freedom. I am sure you can check Wikipedia or political philosophy textbooks to verify this yourself. The dynamic interaction between the two schools of thought on this website would eliminate naval gazing and stimulate meaningful competitive rivalry in the intellectual sphere.