Mr. Peter Feeney:

Many journalists would be reluctant to see their newspapers take money directly from the Government. They would feel that would compromise their independence. Other measures could be taken. Senator Warfield mentioned the possibility of training schemes, apprenticeships, etc. There could be means by which the Government could support newspapers without directly funding them. The problem with directly funding newspapers is that for some people it would create the perception that they were no longer independent of the Government. Credibility demands that newspapers are seen to be independent of the Government, and other vested interests of course, including employers and business organisations, etc. Getting the balance and perception right is not easy. Therefore, direct funding of the media by the Government could present problems and there is a need to explore other means of doing this.

One of the suggestions could be levies on social media, which are taking 85% of the revenue of newspapers. Such revenue could be channelled to local media without it being seen to be part of Government funding. There are mechanisms that could be explored. In some countries, for example, newspapers have a preferential rate for being posted out, making it cheaper than having the newspaper delivered by regular post. There are other little measures like that could be used.

Consideration could be given to the Government being involved. We see this happening, for example, in the Department of Foreign Affairs, which funds journalists doing stories on Irish aid. Their airfares or accommodation costs will be paid. The Department is not paying the salaries of the journalists concerned, but it is assisting them in carrying out the research. Therefore, mechanisms exist which can be explored and which would allow support for journalism without "contaminating", if I can use that term, that journalism by giving funds directly.