Journalists' wage is not low enough

The title is sad but true.  I want to talk about it in two ways. One is value, the other is supply and demand in labor market.

 

Let’s talk about value first. As Picard mentioned, the key to journalists’ wage is to see how much value they create. Picard listed the value journalists create, which is near zero.  “Accessing sources, determining significance of information, and conveying it effectively.”

 

Picard indicated that journalists deserved low pay due to the technology. Technology provides people the access of information which was exclusive before.  In a sense, the wage of journalists should be lower as a new information technology came out. Furthermore, citizen journalist should make journalists lower pay because citizen journalists substitute journalists. We can compare journalist’s wage in the past and now.  In Taiwan, journalists indeed got lower pay than before.

The reason to explain is that journalists are very easy to be substituted. The one who can get higher pay not only depends on the value one create but how irreplaceable the one is.

 

Picard mentioned it in the article.  Journalistic labor is commoditized. Every journalist repeats the same thing. It is not easy to have unique angle or story based on fact. There is only one truth about fact. The value of their labor is to have unique comments or insight other than just facts. That's why columnist or journalists with special expertise get higher pay.  Therefore, to be unique, or to be irreplaceable is the key to survive in media. To be a journalist is easy, anyone who can speak or anyone who can write can be a journalist but to be a good journalist or an irreplaceable journalist is very difficult.

 

In terms of uniqueness, Picard pointed out that “Every paper will have to be the undisputed leader in terms of their quality and quantity of local news”” The Des Moines Register could become the leader in agricultural news; and the Chicago Tribune in airline and aircraft coverage.” In my opinion, it is not easy to do. For readers, they still want to read a newspaper with general news, they wont purchase Chicago Tribune if there is no news from airline or air craft. So for newspapers, specialized coverage is probably not very helpful in selling daily news. The other value of labor is to speak out for some specific people, especially for those who have strong purchase power.

       When it comes to value, my question is how to judge the value of information, and the value of social impact?

 

 

Supply and demand explains journalists wage. Some factors influence labor supply: The quantity of workers, the amount of time each labor works, nonmonetary income and psychic income—prestige, power or the feeling of serving society (Picard, 1989). Demand for labor is to see that the value of the additional output achieved by adding a unit of labor. That is to say, the introduction of technology decreases the demand of labor.

     Journalists deserve low pay due to over supply of labor force and the introduction of new technology, which results in lower demand for labor force. The way to increase wage is to reduce supply of labor. Journalists are unlike lawyers or doctors who needs license. That means lower entry barrier of this job leads to over supply of the labor force. The other way to reduce over supply of labor is to give lower wage than it is now. When the wage is too low for people to be a journalist. The supply of labor force decreases, then there is a chance for more waged.  The conclusion is that journalists’ wage is not low enough. 

 

 

Reference:

Picard, R. (1989) Media Economics: Concept and Issues. CA: Sage