I’ve just spent a week in a basement (such a glamorous life) with journalists and technologists, working on how to use AI effectively in newsrooms. Included in the mix were members of a partner organisation, the European Journalism Centre (EJC), who spent some time telling us about a few of the projects they’re working on. One of them was what they call “live journalism”. For the first 15 minutes I assumed they were talking about journalism delivered on one of the livestreaming platforms like Twitch, before I remembered that there is still a real world out there.
Journalism done live in the way it’s done on Twitch is, in some ways, the distillation of what journalism should be. It’s all about a live relationship with your audience, where information flows both ways and journalism is implemented in real time. And fact-checked in real time too, for that matter. Some might suggest that these attributes are even more important in the digital realm than they were back in the days when news brands still privileged physical artefacts. But it turned out that the live journalism the EJC was talking about is a way more retro expression of this.
To borrow their definition: “Live journalism is an evolving practice that brings verified reporting to the stage, transforming journalism into a shared in-person experience.” Some live events, like panel discussions with journalists or podcast recordings, tick the live bit, but not the journalism bit. The EJC points out that, in these cases, while the journalist might facilitate or debate, they aren’t presenting their own reporting as — and I believe this is the important part — a performed story. “In live journalism, the performance itself becomes the journalistic act.”
I remember the early days of trying to take newsrooms to the now quaintly named state of “digital first”. How journalists complained! You want me to do what? Put up 140-character “tweets”, or whatever they’re called, that are supposed to have some journalistic impact? I need at least 2,000 words! You want me to carry around a mobile phone and shoot video when I’m interviewing someone? You want me to answer an actual reader on a chat platform? Impossible. This is not journalism.
Don’t even get me started on how difficult it was to rename journalists as content creators, a practice which seems to have come full circle now, with content creators being urged to rename themselves as journalists.
Now here we are, asking journalists — typically not known for their desire to be exposed to the spotlight, especially the investigative journalists — to stand on a stage and be showmen and -women. Carnival barkers for the truth, if you will.
Going theatrical
And yet, in a world where journalism is competing for attention in an extraordinarily unfair ecosystem deliberately designed to reward vacuity, lies and ragebait, and where audiences are increasingly looking for more authentic experiences, live journalism might just be a small part of a larger answer.
There are some strict conditions for how live journalism is defined. It has to be based on verified journalistic reporting, rather than a social media stream or a meme. It must originate from factual, evidence-based journalism, not fiction, advocacy or creative interpretation. And the bit that I find compelling is that “the journalistic act itself is experienced in real time, creating co-presence between storyteller and audience. It intentionally creates an audience relationship and/or participation. The audience is not passive: their presence, emotion or engagement is integral to how the story is received.”
I haven’t had the opportunity to experience one of Daily Maverick associate editor Marianne Thamm’s highly rated and, by most accounts, thoroughly enjoyable performances of her Freshly Squeezed shows. Is this what we mean by live journalism? But deploying rigid definitions is not important. I love the idea of making journalism theatrical (at least until we finally get AI actors, that is).
An example of how to do this was the Data Cuisine concept of a few years ago, which translated data journalism and complex statistics into edible dishes, using food as a medium for data expression. In Barcelona, for example, pizzas were made to visualise the ratio of public to private funding across different sectors in Spain, with the pizza base representing the total budget of a sector and the toppings representing the funding sources. Salty anchovies represented private funding, mild olives public funding. Participants could tell how a sector was funded by tasting. Lots of salty anchovies, for instance, meant the sector relied almost entirely on private investments. In South Africa we’d use ham and pineapple, of course.
And having localised choices is probably the point. I doubt live journalism will materially change the news industry, but it sure sounds like a fun way to keep it interesting.
