Journalists are not paid to peddle good publicity, but to produce stories that their readers are interested in, argues Roger Cowe
All publicity is supposed to be good publicity, but that is not the way it seems when a company is exposed for its environmental performance or human rights record.
The natural response is to ask why journalists never seem to report environmental improvements or new policies on child labour and community support. This is sometimes cited as a reason why companies do not want to produce environmental and social reports – the ‘head above the parapet’ problem.
It is a little alarming for a journalist to consider that news values could be holding back social responsibility. But if that is the case, companies are to blame – not the news media. Either it is right to carry on business responsibly or it is not. Managers who make a decision depending on the publicity they might win have got hold of the wrong end of the stick. In any case, it is wrong to expect a balance between ‘good’ and ‘bad’ news. Journalists are not there to peddle good publicity. They are paid to produce stories which their readers are interested in – balanced only in the sense of reflecting reality as accurately as possible.
The requirement for such balance does not mean producing one ‘good news’ story for every negative item. It means reporting the bad news in perspective.
Why is bad news more interesting? Partly because reporters aim to come up with stories that the people involved would rather did not see the light of day. That is one of the functions of journalism. But more generally, people want news about the few trains that crash, not the many which arrive safely (and even on time); the occasional pollution incident, not the months of beating emission targets. The unexpected makes news – man bites dog, scouts do bad deeds, directors take pay cuts. That last example demonstrates that all news is not negative. Similarly, Shell’s first environmental report was news because it was a first and marked a change in direction.
There are plenty of business awards schemes for good practice which provide an opportunity for good publicity. But most national media news editors would probably judge even the largest awards, such as the annual Business in the Community shindig, of limited interest in themselves. They will only get significant coverage if somebody important says something newsworthy.
News is not the only journalistic product, however. Features take increasing space in most newspapers, and provide scope for journalists to highlight best practice.
Even so, national media filter everything that is happening in the world and present a tiny proportion to their audience. There will always be room for only a sip of the whole, frothing soup.
Roger Cowe writes for The Guardian newspaper.