It would seem that most people, whether they are conscious of it or not, view the news through a political prism. The Reuters Institute’s Digital News Report 2017 puts Malaysians’ level of trust in the media at 29%, among the lowest of all the countries surveyed.

To say that there is distrust in the press is to put it mildly. The publication of upsetting information is quickly attributed to a news organisation’s perceived agenda which can be labelled as both a ‘liberal agent’ or ‘government mouthpiece’, though not at the same time, for the mere act of reporting. The report above reflected this skepticism in its finding that Malaysians’ overwhelmingly perceive that the news they were reading was not free from political or commercial influence.

While this can be seen as clarion call for greater independence in news organisations, that enthusiasm is dimmed by the report’s finding that only 20% of Malaysians pay for online news. The industry is no more lucrative for traditional media neither, as audience numbers continue shrinking and revenues from advertising (long the sector’s lifeblood) continue its downward slide.

It will be difficult to change readers’ habit of reading (and viewing) the news for free online. Even then, it is important to discuss this idea, as the financial health of the news industry has deep effects on society’s well-being.

The question of how to fund quality journalism is important because it helps to ensure that important information keeps flowing, and tough questions continue to be asked. Journalism is not merely relating what a minister or politician said, but a profession with processes and procedures that need to be carried out, and standards to be adhered to. As with any vocation, quality journalism does not come cheap, and news organisations have to make sure that they generate enough income to enable their employees to do their jobs as best they can and earn a decent living.

It would seem as if the internet has removed the difference between national news organisations, and citizen journalists or bloggers re-posting news reports by making information cheap and abundant. However, the low-cost of publishing online does not mean that the cost of chasing that story has similarly bottomed out. It should come as no surprise that the lack of resources will compromise the ability of news organisations to be where they need to be, especially when it comes to local and specialised reporting.

This impacts the level of diversity in information and opinions presented, where organisations with access to more resources are able to set the news agenda. This diminished pool of information then becomes the source that smaller organisations, commentators, and the public then depend on to form opinions and make decisions. Further, for issues to emerge as a matter of professional routine, instead of being sourced from advocacy groups or interested parties, it should have some depoliticising effect since readers can place a greater level of trust in the independence of the journalists and publications reporting on them.

The human aspect of journalism – perhaps what is most important – also requires financial wherewithal to achieve the esteemed goals of the profession. Investigative journalism, for example, is an activity that requires a lot of resources; for background research, travel, tests, surveys, and other components that are needed to present an accurate and important story. Even smaller, less glamorous activities, such as independent fact-checking sites, which enable readers to quickly look up claims and rumours, need access to archives and libraries, as well as the brainpower that keeps thing humming. It goes without saying that to attract (and keep talent), a journalism career has to be seem as one that allows one to make a decent living.

Beyond the nuts and bolts, a stronger revenue stream that comes from readers helps protect editorial integrity. Today, anyone can buy a top-level domain name, and a slick-looking Wordpress template and claim that they are an independent news organisation. Readers may have some difficulty to decide whether they are a drinkable fount of information, or there to serve a skewed version of the world based on their founders’ agenda.

Not that this a new problem in this age of cheap hosting and affordable software. The professionalisation of the news industry that began in the late 19th century itself was a response to the then prevalent agenda-laden “Yellow Journalism”. A strong revenue stream, independent of corporate advertising and patrons, afford newsrooms greater ability to chase the stories deemed important.

The news industry has an important role to play in informing the public of important events and incidents, but as an industry it requires healthy revenues to allow it to do what it aims to do. Although increasing reader subscriptions is not a magic pill that will guarantee that our news flow is fair and balanced, it can help fuel the work that needs to be done. To paraphrase Michael Schudson, Professor of Journalism at Columbia University, it is the combination of profits,professionalism and the presumption of publicness that produces the best journalism.

The fury with which many from all sides of the divide decry the state of news-reporting should be followed up with a commitment to support, and invest in building a strong news industry in the country. After all, our own publications should have the resources needed to tell our own stories and cover our own scandals that can win Pulitzers. – July 24, 2017.

* Lutfi is a fan of podcasts, cinema, dry history books, and technology (not neccessarily in that order). Currently studying for a Masters in political communication in Sheffield, he is an associate of IMAN Research.

* This is the opinion of the writer or publication and does not necessarily represent the views of The Malaysian Insight. Article may be edited for brevity and clarity.