Will the Last Reporter Please Turn out the Lights: The Collapse of Journalism and What Can Be Done To Fix It

by Robert W. McChesney (Editor), Victor Pickard (Editor)

The sudden meltdown of the news media has sparked one of the liveliest debates in recent memory, with an outpouring of opinion and analysis crackling across journals, the blogosphere, and academic publications. Yet, until now, we have lacked a comprehensive and accessible introduction to this new and shifting terrain.

In Will the Last Reporter Please Turn out the Lights, celebrated media analysts Robert W. McChesney and Victor Pickard have assembled thirty-two illuminating pieces on the crisis in journalism, revised and updated for this volume. Featuring some of today’s most incisive and influential commentators, this comprehensive collection contextualizes the predicament faced by the news media industry through a concise history of modern journalism, a hard-hitting analysis of the structural and financial causes of news media’s sudden collapse, and deeply informed proposals for how the vital role of journalism might be rescued from impending disaster.

Sure to become the essential guide to the journalism crisis, Will the Last Reporter Please Turn out the Lights is both a primer on the news media today and a chronicle of a key historical moment in the transformation of the press.

Genres: Nonfiction, Journalism

372 pages, Paperback

First published February 8, 2011

About the author

Robert Waterman McChesney was an American professor notable in the history and political economy of communications, and the role media play in democratic and capitalist societies. He was the Gutgsell Endowed Professor in the Department of Communication at the University of Illinois at Urbana–Champaign. He co-founded the Free Press, a national media reform organization. From 2002 to 2012, he hosted Media Matters, a weekly radio program every Sunday afternoon on WILL (AM), Illinois Public Media radio.

Reviews

[Emma Sea · Rating 4 out of 5]

This gave me some highly interesting insights into 21st century media. As a collection of essays there's always going to be ones I found great and ones that bored me (hint: anything with multiple graphs).

I did have to laugh at Eric Alterman's 2008 piece, which held the Huffington Post up as pretty much the perfect independent post-newspaper news media; three years, that is, before their buyout by AOL (and the outcry from their bloggers who suddenly realised their unpaid work was what earned Arianna Huffington $315 million).

Overall my favourites were:

** Clay Shirkey's Newspapers and the Unthinkable (original blog post still available here).

** Todd Gitlin's piece (available online here) tracing the origin of the decline of newspapers to the 1960s (I just started Knightfall: Knight Ridder and How the Erosion of Newspaper Journalism Is Putting Democracy at Risk which is fabulous, and has a whole lot more about this). I didn't realise that the average age of viewers for Fox News is over 65. I feel a bit depressed about this, in that it just reinforces stereotypes of reactionary 'old people' who don't like that women get to vote now, but it's also encouraging, because I catch Fox News sometimes if I flip up from a David Attenborough doco on 74, to watch Finn and Jake on 102, and recoil as I hit bigotry and hate speech on 88*. I'd be sad if the average fan was 18-35.

** Robert McChesney and John Nichols's Down the News Hole (sadly not available online as far as I can tell).

A great book, from which I learned a whole bunch.

EDIT: There's an interesting piece here on the lack of broadcast journalism coverage of the Texas abortion bill filibuster: the failure of the "third screen" to report on the issues that many people are vitally interested in, which they threfore follow online (apparently CNN was playing a repeat of a Piers Morgan item on the calories in a blueberry muffin).


* 88! Can you believe Fox is on 88 here? Someone at my cable company did that on purpose!

[Gale · Rating 2 out of 5]

Talk about burying the lead.

This collection of essays ranges from insightful to droll, trailblazing to mindlessly repetitive. The first half and last third of this anthology can be captured in perhaps three or four essays, with the remainder repeating them in so many words.

It’s a shame, because some of the points to be made here are very important, but sifting the signal from the noise takes a level of perseverance that even many authors admit is hard to come by in the average citizen’s day. While I admire the editors’ dedication to portraying a diversity of views on the media “crisis” (some authors cited deny this characterization, hence the quotes), I believe they failed to concisely select what needed to be presented to furnish a working understanding of the media landscape.

My recommendation? Skim aggressively. The essays that are distinct and illuminating will reveal themselves by not feeling like deja vu.

[Kyle Stephen · Rating 4 out of 5]

Important historical context of news industry. Entertaining and as well written as expected given the caliber of the contributors. It's missing contents regarding the role of fragility via leveraged buyouts and vulture capital though. Very cool to learn about the Seattle times from the hiers themselves!

[Jason · Rating 3 out of 5]

Very good essays that chronicle the ups and downs of American media and the flawed business model of print journalism. Not sure I agree with the overall consensus that quality journalism must be financed or heavily subsidized by the government. I like the idea of foundations or other nonprofits given subsidies and other consideration to publish news. It is a nice trend to see citizen journalists holding media to reporting standards.

[Aliya · Rating 3 out of 5]

An interesting collection of essays arguing for government funding and subsidies to move the news industry forward. Somewhat confusing at times as certain contributors contradict the main point, however. A bit too negative toward the future of the journalism industry overall; no matter what, journalism will somehow survive.

[Whitney · Rating 3 out of 5]

Essays were highly repetitive. I was expecting more on the art form of journalism and content as we have to adapt to new media not just the act of printing and paying for it. Perhaps that was my error for not researching this book more.

[Whitney Bermes · Rating 3 out of 5]

Lots of good perspectives, but many repetitive essays.

[Jessica · Rating 4 out of 5]

This is a great compilation of works surrounding the fall of the newspaper and possible solutions for the future. It was very well done. I enjoyed it!