Daniel Keyes

It’s an interesting time to be graduating with a journalism degree. Not only is the economy in rough shape, but the industry is in the middle of a pivotal transformation. Not because anyone asked for it, but because evolution is the only way this industry can survive into the future. And since the dawn of the printing press, there hasn’t been a time when such a vast shift in the way news is distributed has been so crucial.

Accepting my Bachelor of Journalism degree at Ryerson University's convocation ceremony on Thursday. Photo cred: Gary Gould

The internet is instant and accessible. Unlike newspapers and television, anyone can be a publisher or broadcaster online with very few recourses. Traditional broadcasters and publications already started hurting before the recession hit as advertising dollars moved online. And with all the competition on the net, it’s a lot harder to make a buck – especially when everyone is used to getting online content for free.

The mood is bleak among my colleagues. No one knows where the industry will go or how we’ll earn a living doing something so few will pay for and so many will do for free. But I have faith it will all be sorted out in time, as long as we remember what’s important – good stories and strong research. Really good research costs money and takes time. And a society that values truth and knowledge will find a way to pay for it.

But before any of that can happen, journalists need to let go of this extinct breed of news which so many are still clinging to. Citizen journalism is real and great for democracy. But it’s tough being a great investigator when you have a day job to worry about. We need to evolve. We need to be relevant. We need to stop chattering on TV with other journalists and calling it news. There’s no turning back now if journalism is going to survive.

A story that generated much publicity in the wake of the 9/11 terrorist attacks has become the centrepiece of a Supreme Court hearing that could permanently alter the scope of defamation law in Canada.

Lawyers for the Ottawa Citizen and more than a dozen other media organizations urged the top court yesterday to endorse a new defence against libel that would protect properly researched stories published in the public interest, even if they contain errors.

Full Story (Thanks for bringing this story to my attention, Dad) 

As someone who practices journalism, this story is particularly relevant to me. As the law stands now, if I publish something that could potentially tarnish someone’s reputation, I can be charged with libel even if I approached the story with the best intentions for public interest or if the information was false because one of my sources lied to me. This makes publishing controversial stories quite risky, and discourages journalists from pursuing important stories that could put them in hot water. Depending how this case goes, that could all change.