Small editorial team, big newspaper
The crisis has claimed around 500 editorial jobs in Switzerland so far. "Experts" such as Kurt W. Zimmermann, Res Strehle and Felix E. Müller see these cuts as an opportunity to improve the quality of newspapers. The only question is: how? Guest commentary by Hans Stutz, freelance journalist.
As we have (almost) all had to realize by now, neoliberals have reinvented the economic world in the years since Milton Friedmann and Margaret Thatcher, and Kurt W. Zimmermann is their loudest mouthpiece in Switzerland, at least in the media industry. Or perhaps only in Weltwoche, and then only after Roger Köppel. Be that as it may, the "well-known sports journalist" (Festschrift Golfclub Realp) recently performed a remarkable pirouette of thought in the weekly paper for the annoyed right-wing bourgeoisie when he commented on the abolition of around 500 editorial positions, although Zimmermann only wanted to count up to 250.
According to Zimmermann, there is now hope that "newspapers will become real newspapers again". He continued: "If editorial offices become smaller, newspapers will almost automatically become better." A newspaper has to convey topicality and analyze it intelligently. You can also imagine it as a newspaper with lots of agency reports and some commentary, or at best analysis. In times of crisis, cranks and fortune tellers are booming, one might think.
Res Strehle (Tages-Anzeiger) and Felix E. Müller (NZZ am Sonntag) also advocate the following motto for quality newspapers: less, more precise, more original. So far so plausible. It is unclear whether this is possible with fewer journalists. Journalistic competence requires in-depth knowledge of dossiers and this is not possible without paid work, unless you leave the commentary to some "experts" from interest organizations, such as Avénir Suisse. However, this is only at the expense of journalistic reputation.
As luck would have it, on the very day that Zimmermann publishes his weekly rant, publisher president Hanspeter Lebrument calls for government relief for publishers of - roughly estimated - over half a billion francs in an interview with the Basler Zeitung. The Südostschweiz monopolist is reluctant to use the word "subsidies", instead referring to "framework conditions" and meaning lower value-added taxes, reductions in postal taxes (as was once common practice) and state subsidies for journalism training. Lebrument also reacts defensively; he wants to prevent "a press diversity article" in the constitution.
Up to now, Lebrument's broadsides against state regulations have been one of the highlights of every publishers' congress, although most of the audience knew that Lebrument himself was the uncrowned Swiss champion in the pursuit of subsidies. The publisher president has now announced new publisher proposals. The public service for the diversity of opinion in Switzerland is indeed at risk, but it is unclear whether the existing regional monopolies are the right address to safeguard it. (Who will launch the next newspaper? Perhaps only on the Internet at first?)
What conclusions can we draw from this? Firstly. Neo-liberalism is whistling out of the last hole. No sensible person can complain about this. Secondly. If Lebrument changes ideology, then there really is a need for action, not only in the federal parliament (media article in the constitution), but also at the listed Tamedia group, of course. Although it is laying off around 80 people (Tagi & Der Bund), it reported a profit of CHF 105 million for 2008, of which it paid out over CHF 31 million to shareholders, i.e. withdrew it from the Group. With this money, the redundant employees could contribute to the improvement of the newspapers for several years. If the editorial teams remain larger, the likelihood of a reduction in quality decreases. If we were as uninhibited as Zimmermann, we could even write: If editorial teams get bigger, then quality increases almost automatically. And finally. Thirdly: "A publisher should not expect too much profit," says Lebrument. Where he is right, he is right. He may even have to be satisfied with small losses for a year or two. But that's not possible on the stock market.
According to Zimmermann, there is now hope that "newspapers will become real newspapers again". He continued: "If editorial offices become smaller, newspapers will almost automatically become better." A newspaper has to convey topicality and analyze it intelligently. You can also imagine it as a newspaper with lots of agency reports and some commentary, or at best analysis. In times of crisis, cranks and fortune tellers are booming, one might think.
Res Strehle (Tages-Anzeiger) and Felix E. Müller (NZZ am Sonntag) also advocate the following motto for quality newspapers: less, more precise, more original. So far so plausible. It is unclear whether this is possible with fewer journalists. Journalistic competence requires in-depth knowledge of dossiers and this is not possible without paid work, unless you leave the commentary to some "experts" from interest organizations, such as Avénir Suisse. However, this is only at the expense of journalistic reputation.
As luck would have it, on the very day that Zimmermann publishes his weekly rant, publisher president Hanspeter Lebrument calls for government relief for publishers of - roughly estimated - over half a billion francs in an interview with the Basler Zeitung. The Südostschweiz monopolist is reluctant to use the word "subsidies", instead referring to "framework conditions" and meaning lower value-added taxes, reductions in postal taxes (as was once common practice) and state subsidies for journalism training. Lebrument also reacts defensively; he wants to prevent "a press diversity article" in the constitution.
Up to now, Lebrument's broadsides against state regulations have been one of the highlights of every publishers' congress, although most of the audience knew that Lebrument himself was the uncrowned Swiss champion in the pursuit of subsidies. The publisher president has now announced new publisher proposals. The public service for the diversity of opinion in Switzerland is indeed at risk, but it is unclear whether the existing regional monopolies are the right address to safeguard it. (Who will launch the next newspaper? Perhaps only on the Internet at first?)
What conclusions can we draw from this? Firstly. Neo-liberalism is whistling out of the last hole. No sensible person can complain about this. Secondly. If Lebrument changes ideology, then there really is a need for action, not only in the federal parliament (media article in the constitution), but also at the listed Tamedia group, of course. Although it is laying off around 80 people (Tagi & Der Bund), it reported a profit of CHF 105 million for 2008, of which it paid out over CHF 31 million to shareholders, i.e. withdrew it from the Group. With this money, the redundant employees could contribute to the improvement of the newspapers for several years. If the editorial teams remain larger, the likelihood of a reduction in quality decreases. If we were as uninhibited as Zimmermann, we could even write: If editorial teams get bigger, then quality increases almost automatically. And finally. Thirdly: "A publisher should not expect too much profit," says Lebrument. Where he is right, he is right. He may even have to be satisfied with small losses for a year or two. But that's not possible on the stock market.
