via slideshare.net
Kiinnostavaa dataa mediayhtiön Facebook-fanien käyttäytymisestä. Yksi tärkeimpiä havaintoja on kaverien suositusten vaikutus median kulutukseen ja Facebookin tärkeys mediana.
{ 0 comments }
Overall the number of employed journalists, based on the CPS, has increased by 19% over the past three year. Meanwhile, the number of employed college graduates has risen by only 3%, and overall employment, as measured by the CPS, has dropped by almost 5%. How can the number of employed journalists rise, given that employment in the publishing and broadcasting industries has fallen? Over a comparable time period, employment in newspaper publishing has fallen 26%; periodical employment is down 16%; and radio and television broadcasting is down 11%.
Nämäkin luvut kertovat, että journalismi voi hyvin ja journalisteille on tarvetta, vaikka perinteisillä mediayrityksillä menisi taloudellisesti huonommin kuin aiemmin. Koska yleisöllä on halu ja tarve mediaan, journalismiin ja sisältöihin, tarve täytetään tavalla tai toisella myös murroksen keskellä ja jälkeen. Kuinka suuri rooli perinteisillä mediayhtiöllä on tässä murroksen jälkeen, on ihan toinen kysymys. Uusilla työkaluilla varustettuja journalisteja tarvitaan aina.
Selitykset, miksi journalistien määrä onkin kasvanut, vaikka perinteiset mediayhtiöt työllistävät journalisteja selvästi aiempaa vähemmän, ovat mielenkiintoisia ja kertovat että journalismista on yhä enemmän tulossa aikaisempaa heikommin palkattu kutsumusammatti, monitaitoisten taitureiden pelikenttä ja yrittäjävetoisempi ammatti.
“Explanation #1: Journalists are being hired in nontraditional industries. Yahoo, for example, hired Jane Sasseen, BW’s very good Washington Bureau chief, to help beef up politics coverage. That job likely shows up in the industry “internet publishing and broadcasting and web search portals”, which has grown by 22% over the past three years. Or take my business, Visible Economy LLC. We’ve hired three young journalists, but it’s tough to say whether these jobs would show up in educational services or in journalism.
Explanation #2: Some of the gain in journalist jobs simply represents an increase in self-employment. True, but as it turns out, the number of the number of “news analysts, reporters, and correspondents” employed by others has risen by 15% over the past three years. That’s not as big as 19%, but it isn’t bad.
Explanation #3: Reporters have done better, jobwise, than editors and production support personnel. Generally speaking, the new technologies allow a delayering of journalistic organizations–fewer editors and production support personnel needed to get out the same amount of content.
Take a look at this chart, which shows the number of people employed in the broad category of ‘editors’.
Unlike reporters, the number of editors is down over the past three years, by about 2%. However, if we add together the two categories (“news analysts, reporters and correspondents” plus “editors”) the total employment gain over three years for “journalistic occupations” is a decent 5%, beating out the overall gain for college grads.
Explanation #4: Maybe the jobs are there, but it’s possible they could be worse-paying, fewer hours etc. There is certainly some truth to this. The median weekly wage for full-time reporters et al fell by 1.5% between 2008 and 2009, according to BLS calculations. Meanwhile, the median weekly earnings for all managers and professionals rose by 1.9%. I don’t yet feel confident to extend the wage analysis to 2010.
All four explanations are true simultaneously, I think: A shift in journalistic employment to nontraditional industries, an increased in the self-employed, a delayering of journalism, and perhaps lower pay.”
Olemmeko siis journalismin kulta-ajan kynnyksellä? Palkkaa siitä en saa kuten ennen mutta onpahan paljon hauskempaa ja luovempaa 
{ 0 comments }