"Public Eyes", PIJ.org.nz & Public Interest Journalism in NZ

Monday, 2 December 2013, 6:07 pm
Speech: Alastair Thompson

NOTE: The following is an edited version of a speech delivered by Scoop Editor Alastair Thompson at AUT School of Communications on Friday morning introducing a workshop on the proposed Aotearoa ( New Zealand ) Foundation for Public Interest Journalism. The speech marked the launch of a consultation on the founding documents of the foundation. These can be read at - and submissions can be posted via - the http://pij.org.nz/ website.

Speech follows:

First a disclaimer: My remarks today about the Aotearoa, New Zealand Public Interest Journalism Foundation are my views alone, not those of the Steering Committee for the project. This workshop however will describe and address the collective work of a Steering Committee of eight which have been working to put this together over the past 11 months. The members of the steering committee are :

Margaret Thompson - Scoop Chair
Alison McCulloch - veteran reporter and editor, now freelancer and sometime abortion law reform activist.
Stephen Olsen - Veteran of this conference freelance writer and currently Scoop collaborator
Dr Gavin Ellis - Former NZ Herald Editor
Jeremy Rose - Ideas and Mediawatch presenter.
Chris Barton - Former NZ Herald feature writer, now freelancer
and
My co-spokesperson for the project, Science Media Center editor Peter Griffin.

The committee was joined for a period of several months by freelancer and long form journalism specialist Amanda Cropp who is based in Christchurch. Amanda - who featured in an earlier speech about what was then The Scoop Foundation Project - stepped down from the committee when she took up her first job in Public Relations in the middle of the year.

It has been a great pleasure for me this year working with a steering committee which has been so determined to get the job done and whom have all very generously contributed their time, skills and enthusiasm in our shared enterprise.

I would particularly like to acknowledge the work of my mother Margaret whose efforts shepherding through some of the legal detail has enabled to navigate a complicated set of legal considerations to produce what I hope will proves to be a workable and practical structure.

Over the course of 2014 the committee has met, debated and deliberated and worked on the ideas and communication of the ideas behind this project.

We haven’t always initially agreed on everything - which is as it should be. And I have changed my mind about a lot of things.

The committee has been operating on a consensus basis which we hope will be an example to how we would hope the foundation will be managed post incorporation.

In the past few weeks the pace has stepped up considerably and the project has very much come together with gathering momentum.

Energy levels have risen and it very much feels like we are now approaching the finish line.

We now have a stellar/luminary group of possible trustees and editorial panel members for establishment.

We expect to shortly (realistically probably early in the New Year) complete phase one of the establishment phase when the Steering Committee will finalise and lodge the Trust Deed, complete consultation on the proposed editorial panel rules, name the initial trustees and nominate the members of an initial editorial panel.

And at that point we will hand over the baton to the Trustees and Editorial Panel to complete the process on establishment and get on with business.

We will then start active fund-raising efforts and it is my hope that the first funded work of the foundation will start around the same time - depending of course on how swiftly we manage to get some funds flowing into the foundation.

Introduction to the Scoop perspective and background with this project

Seven months ago I presented the inaugural Pacific Scoop fellowship to Post-Graduate AUT Student Daniel Drageset as we launched what was then called the "Scoop Foundation Project" on April 18th in Professor Robie's Pacific Media Center.

It was an auspicious day.

Scoop wanted to mark the occasion of unveiling something we had been considering internally for about 18 months with a concrete example of the sort of thing we had in mind to fund when we first started working on developing a philanthropic funding stream for journalism in NZ.

The relatively small grant that we made to Daniel - approximately $5000 - was funded out of database royalties earned from the content of the Pacific Scoop website over the previous year. It was used to pay Daniel as a part time editor for Pacific.Scoop.co.nz for a period of nearly six months while Professor David Robie was away on sabbatical.

But while the sum is small - what it enabled is no small thing.

Pacific Scoop which is a joint venture between Scoop Independent News and the Pacific Media Center has become a hub for Pacific News over its several years of operations and now sits alongside Radio New Zealand International as a significant contributor to vital coverage of the news in an unreported and vast area of the world.

As Russell has explained in his remarks earlier traditional commercial news reality is being disrupted spectacularly by change. Even in relatively large affluent markets like New Zealand all branches of the commercial media a shrinking. And the online component in this is not faring any better with most of the growing marketing spend in the area going to overseas businesses which have not role in producing content at all, let alone news content.

A commercial model to fund timely online news about politics in the Pacific is pretty much inconceivable at this point in time. Which is why we wanted to open the door to a new method of funding public interest reportage which provides some scale and heft.

- Introduction to the idea - philanthropic journalism funding ( tax deductable to donors ) and coordinating crowd-funding for journalism

Around the world Philanthropic Journalism ventures have been flourishing in recent years. They started - like all things internet - in the US where philanthropy has deep pockets and a strong tradition of involvement in media.

Closer to home there are a number of experiments in this area operational already in Australia - but nothing substantial has been launched in New Zealand till now.

Towards the end of last year, 2012, Bernard Hickey raised an initial flag with his Journalism.org.nz project. While this initial foray faltered after a few months, the Scoop Foundation Project picked up the baton at the end of 2012 and as the year's end approaches we are on the verge of launching "Public Eyes" which is the name we appear to be settling on for the public face of the foundation's activities.

Over the past two weeks the Steering Committee have published first the draft Trust Deed and Company Constitution ( which are the core governance documents ) to a new website built by committee member Stephen Olsen at PIJ.co.nz.

These documents have been published for public consultation and we have called also for expressions of interest, and nominations, for what will be voluntary positions as trustees and editorial panel members in the foundation.

The response to the finalised plans ( just as in April ) has been outstandingly positive.

Among those who have expressed an interest in being a trustee are Read Write Web founder Richard McManus and well known journalist and speaker Rod Oram.

We have also had positive responses from several wealthy NZ philanthropists who have said they will welcome approaches from the new foundation once it is set up, operational and has charitable status.

- introduction to the Organisational Structure

The draft Trust Deed and company constitution for the Public Eyes publisher was commissioned by a subcommittee of the Steering Committee from Wellington based charitable trust specialist Chris Kelly.

In designing the structure our brief sought to respond to the particular circumstances faced in NZ for an entity of this kind including:
- A desire to protect trustees and trust funds from exposure to legal liability which might arise out of legal action over material funded the trust;
- Seeking to create an organisation which will be fun to work in for the volunteers whose time and enthusiasm will be the key to making this bird fly;
- A need to create a small nimble self-healing organisation scaled for New Zealand.

The draft trust deed provides two layers of governance which are intended to provide resilience - particularly for the Editorial Panel - which, being made up of free-thinking journalists, will need to swiftly establish a culture in keeping with its objectives.

The Trust/Editorial Panel structure mirrors the business and governance / editorial autonomy splits which are typically contained within most large news organisations.

Broadly speaking the role of 4 to 7 trustees will be to raise funds, provide accountability to donors and protect the editorial independence of the editorial panel which will make the editorial decisions.

The deed specifically prohibits trustees from interfering in the decisions of both the panel and or attempting to directly influence journalists working on trust funded work.

Under the proposed structure the second group - The Editorial Panel - which can be comprised of up to 15 members in the deed - is the body that makes decisions on projects, what gets funded - what projects get endorsed etc.

As one observant respondent to the consultation has noted already, the Rules of the Editorial Panel have not yet been drafted in full. These will set out how decisions are made by the panel and how appointments are made to the panel. Once agreed these will be adopted into the articles of association of the company and reviewed annually.

Draft editorial guidelines, editorial principles and a draft mission statement were published this week which will form part of the Rules of the Editorial Panel.

Under the trust deed these rules will be adopted and amended at the AGM of the publishing company which will be wholly owned by the trust.

The company will provide the structure which sits around the Editorial Panel. It will also publish a website - which we are currently thinking will be called Public Eyes - and it will distribute funds to grant recipients.

The separate company structure is intended to protect both trustees and trust funds from exposure to defamation proceedings.

Sittting above the trustees in a position akin to a Head of State with reserve powers are two protectors who have the power to collectively intervene to settle disputes and if necessary dismiss trustees to keep the trust on course.

And finally the trust deed provides for an appointment panel to be convened when it is necessary to appoint new trustees and protectors. This panel will be made up of two members of the trust and two members of the editorial panel.

- introduction to the Editorial Principles + ( a possibility of how this might work in practice - my submission to the Steering Committee's consultation )

As mentioned above we have this week published draft editorial principles and guidelines for the foundation.

This part of the documentation reads much more like something from a journalism text-book ( and less like a legal treatise ) - it contains the mission and principles intended for the foundation.

A draft of these was published on Wednesday and we hope you will all agree that its lofty objectives will help the foundation stay true to its intentions to be a provider of journalism which is in the public's interest to have produced.

In summary the draft principles are:

Truth: Our core purpose is to get to the truth – not in an absolute or philosophical sense but in a practical way.
Public interest: The essence of our endeavour is to provide information in the public interest.
Fairness: Issues and people examined as part of projects we fund and support will be treated fairly and professionally.
Independence: Our primary allegiance is to the public and to act as a watchdog over those with power and position with the goal of exposing wrongdoing.
Conflicts of interest: The public deserves factual reporting and informed analysis without our opinions influencing what they hear or see. Our trustees, staff and advisors will declare potential conflicts of interest and exclude themselves from decision-making roles where appropriate.
Transparency: We strive to be open and transparent in the way we operate, from our editorial policies to our funding sources.
Excellence: We aim in everything we do to fund and support quality public interest journalism.

Attached to the principles are editorial guidelines which indicate how the principles will be applied in practice when assessing applications. As with the Trust Deed your feedback is invited on all of this as part of the consultation process currently underway.

We do not believe we have a monopoly of wisdom in this area and we welcome your feedback.

As previously mentioned there is one final piece of the puzzle which we have not yet created and those are the rules of the editorial panel. Its composition and manner of deliberation.

My personal view on this - which I have discussed with the Steering Committee - but which is not yet agreed is:

- The editorial panel should be comprised exclusively of experienced editors who are able to supervise complex editorial projects;
- It should operate as a democracy with the editorial convenor - who is effectively the link between the panel and the company and the trust - bound to implement the rules of a majority;
- It would be preferable if for the most part the panel is able to operate on a consensus, however decisions will be made by a simple majority;
- Appointment to the panel will require nomination from three existing members, and then require election by a majority;
- Panel members ought to serve for a specified period and then come up for reappointment;
- Non-voting advisory members of the panel will be appointed when non-panel members are acting as supervisors of active editorial projects;
- Editorial Panel members will be able to make applications for grants for themselves, however they will need to recuse themselves from discussion about and decisions over their applications to avoid conflicts of interest.

This last issue is likely to be a little contentious.

However it is my view that the panel will make better funding decisions if it is comprised of experienced working journalists - of whom there is a limited pool and these are the same people who are likely to also be able to deliver high quality journalism projects.

The other task we still have to do is to decide what sort of funding mechanisms the trust will employ in the first instance.

The steering committee will make recommendations around this to the Trust and Panel, however ultimately the incoming Trustees and Panel members will be responsible for deciding how these operational matters proceed.

I have a view which I will share today as a starting point for this discussion.

- a possibility of how funding decisions might work in practice - my submission to the Steering Committee's consultation

In the first instance I think funds ought to be applied to high quality, high impact proposals from applicants with a demonstrated ability to deliver. This will ensure that the initial funding decisions will produce work which will reflect well on the intentions of the founders - and raise the profile of the foundation.

Due to the state of our industry a backlog of such projects exists and I am certain that a range of very high quality projects can be found for the initial rounds of funding.

My view is that the funding grants ought to be reasonably large - and the projects reasonably ambitious,

I would suggest grants of $10k or $20k and that the output expected from each project be significant in scale and possibly also multimedia in nature.

I envisage a $10k grant would be expected to result in a couple of months of part time work or six weeks of full time research and writing.

A $20k grant might be part of a larger possibly co-funded piece of work which might involve a reporter working on a project for up to six months.

In my view supervising editors should also receive payment and each project ought to have a supervising editor who is a member (or advisory member) of the editorial panel.

Each application would need a supervising editor attached to it, or if not, obtain one in the course of being approved. Typically the editor might receive between 10% and 20% of the grant in return for assisting the author and editing/peer reviewing the project on behalf of the editorial panel.

In addition to a grants scheme I would be keen to see the foundation adopt an endorsed assisted crowd-sourcing model for projects it considers valuable, capable of being funded, but which fall outside its criteria for funding.

Possible examples might be:

- funding to produce a regular weekly syndicated creative commons column on a high profile, high public interest area news;
- monthly funding to enable a publication such as Gordon Campbell's Werewolf.co.nz to produce a flagship high quality feature about an issue of public policy;
- funding to pay for a facilitator and writer to work on a data-mining project to be undertaken with the assistance of a journalism school into an area of high public interest;

I envisage "Endorsed" crowd sourced journalism projects still having some form of editorial panel supervision. Endorsed projects would be listed on the Public Eyes website and receive active promotion by the foundation and its publishing partners including the likes of Scoop through online advertising.

I also think the foundation could usefully play a role in assisting the emerging new online news websites - i.e. blogs being run by Journalists along Journalistic principles - to raise funds to cover their costs of operation.

Public Address's Russell Brown has proposed the idea of developing an easy to access set of tools and perhaps hub which would help online news providers crowd-fund from their own audiences.

Finally, part of the work the foundation needs to undertake to enable all of the above, involves changing the public perception of news being something which is free, need not be paid for, and which is easily and amply supported by advertising dollars.

To this end we need to encourage people to value quality journalism and it's contribution to society.

Step one of this process calls for us to seek to educate of society that news is something which is important and worth paying for.

- introduction to the workshop part of the presentation

At this point I would like to start the workshop part of this exercise starting by answering any questions you may have on what I have presented so far.

We can then get down into the nitty gritty of workshopping what sort of relationship this new foundation might have with your training institutions. I can see multiple different ways this might occur but it would be best to start with some of your ideas.

I would like to start by introducing Chris Barton, former NZ Herald now freelance feature writer, who is also on the Steering Committee and with us today.

We will not be speaking officially on behalf of the Steering Committee or the new trust during this discussion but we hope that the discussion can inform decisions the Steering Committee takes as it finalises the shape of the proposed foundation in coming weeks

We see huge potential in working with your institutions and your students. The workforce of the future of journalism is, after-all, being trained in your schools.

The purpose of the workshop is to discuss models of engagement e.g.

- co-funding
- co-fundraising
- co-publication
- co-promotion
- Educator involvement in the editorial panel
- student participation perhaps in crowd sourced investigations / data journalism projects
- relationships with specialist journalism orgs e.g. Bruce Jesson Foundation & James Hollings' and Nicky Hager's planned "NZ Center for Investigative Journalism"

ENDS

© Scoop Media

Alastair Thompson

Scoop Publisher

Alastair Thompson is the co-founder of Scoop. He is of Scottish and Irish extraction and from Wellington, New Zealand. Alastair has 24 years experience in the media, at the Dominion, National Business Review, North & South magazine, Straight Furrow newspaper and online since 1997. He is the winner of several journalism awards for business and investigative work.

Contact Alastair Thompson

• Linkedin
• Twitter - @althecat
• Facebook
• Email - alastair@scoop.co.nz