Will Google eat the news media? (Part 1)

(Reproduced from 'The End of Journalism?')

Man vs Machine

Ever since the Luddites began smashing the machines they feared would render their jobs unnecessary, man and machine have enjoyed a turbulent relationship, nowhere more so than in the workplace.

In the 20th century, as computers became better able to deal with ever more complex tasks, it often seemed as if we were heading inexorably towards the day when computers would no longer need us.

The wave of modernity crashed with explosive force onto the shores of the media in the 1980s, changing the face of the industry completely as money men slashed and burned, cutting back on centuries-old institutions with the enthusiasm of a gardener trimming a privet hedge.

Now, as the 20th century begins to fade into memory, journalists are facing the old enemy again: the machines are taking over.

With newspapers struggling to make sense of it all, everyone is beginning to feel the pinch. Experienced reporters and part-time editing staff alike are being politely shown the door, as the industry finds new ways to cut costs.

But for those who are still standing at the end of this great cull, what kind of industry will be left?

The pessimist’s scenario is easy to envisage: a press where stories are no longer unearthed but generated, where news is no longer investigated but aggregated, and where good writing follows the advertising money rather than vice versa.

In this imagined Apocalypse, the only reporter Joe Public needs is a Google-enabled cyber-journalist, spewing out automatically-generated information based on programmed knowledge of Mr. Public’s interests and concerns. The RSS feed already functions as a rude precursor of such a behemoth.

Indeed, the mechanisation of news is already well under way. I am not referring to the bevy of new web-based initiatives such as podcasts, blogs or automatic syndication, but to a far more sinister process; the industrialisation of our raw material – words themselves.

Creativity? No thanks

In the shiny new offices of a daily national newspaper in London, the phrase ‘Search Engine Orientation’ has been all but tattooed onto the heads of internet sub-editors.

Now, instead of writing headlines which not only inform but catch the eye or raise a laugh, subs are being told they must include as many Google search terms as possible in headlines and standfirsts. Even the alternative text for pictures – a service meant for the blind – is being appropriated to boost hit rates.

This may not sound like a dramatic turn of events, but it is sapping the last creative juices from a large section of the media workplace.

One of the greatest headlines of the last few years, possibly of all time, was the Daily Record’s take on footballing minnows Inverness Caledonian Thistle beating giants Celtic in the Scottish Cup. An enterprising sub, taking his inspiration from the film Mary Poppins, penned the immortal headline.

“Super Cally Go Ballistic Celtic Are Atrocious”

It was such a cleverly laid pun, and so popular among journalists in the UK, that it began to be reproduced on websites and in pub conversations up and down the country. Fast forward to the brave new world of ‘Search Engine Orientation’ and what do you get?

“Inverness Caledonian Thistle beat Celtic in Scottish Cup”

Somehow it doesn’t have the same ring to it.

Just as journalists feel themselves being synergised with machines, the tools of our trade – words – are suffering the same fate.