The talent concept moved
into journalism with the development of television news and salaries for
news presenters and leading correspondents that were far above those of average
television reporters. In print journalism, talent initially
involved columnists and then encompassed a few well-known reporters.
Today, the appearances of
journalists at events and on talk shows, individually-authored digital news sites,
and the increasing uses of blogs and social media by journalists is
transforming many into individual brands that are being using to
improve their social standing and connections with audiences. This journalistic branding no longer primarily supports
employers’ interests for audience creation and retention. Instead, it creates an individual
brand that increases the demand for the services of the branded journalist. This,
of course, can be translated in higher wages, better employment opportunities,
or self employment via the digital media.
The fact that
individual journalists are finding ways to increase their value isn’t a
problem, but journalists need to thinking about the point where branding
transforms them into celebrity—thus moving them from being an observer to a
participant in the news they report.
The development of talent—whether as journalists, investment managers, sports personalities, and even publicly
recognized scholars—represents a significant shift in capital-labor relations. In industrial society, capital had
disproportionate power because it controlled factories and labor had few ways to counteract
that power outside of collective bargaining. In post-industrial society,
however, power is shifting toward talent because these branded professionals are a new
class of personnel who are crucial for companies—but talent doesn't fall into the traditional capital or
labor categories.
One of the downsides of this shift, according
to Roger Martin, dean of Rotman School of Management at University of Toronto, is
that it is creates two classes of labor: generic labour and talent. The first
is often undervalued and the second sometimes overvalued. The process is creating disproportionate
incomes, opportunities, and mobility for the latter group and there is growing
animosity between generic labour and talent because they do not share similar
experiences or have a common identity.
What talent will mean to the future of
journalism is uncertain, but digital communications are clearly making it
possible for some journalists to separate themselves from others and to move into
the talent category. It is something we should be watching.
No comments:
Post a Comment