Dr. Dawn Wheatley:

I thank the members of the committee for the invitation to contribute today. I chair the BA journalism degree in the school of communications in DCU which is the country's longest-running journalism degree. I am also a researcher with the institute for future media democracy and society in DCU where, in collaboration with the BAI, since 2015 we have produced the annual Reuters digital news report for Ireland. This survey of the public provides crucial audience data for more than 30 countries about consumption habits and attitudes towards the news. Given the focus of this meeting, it is worth noting that 16% of Irish people pay for online news content, growing just five percentage points in the past five years and in line with the international average. The authors of the main report suggest there is something of a levelling off in international subscription and membership payments after almost a decade of incremental growth. It is clear that for a multitude of reasons we cannot realistically expect the majority of audiences to ever pay for online news subscriptions, let alone multiple subscriptions. Factors such as news avoidance, where people may mistrust the news or find it too negative, are core sectoral challenges impacting on people's willingness to consume news, let alone to take out subscriptions.

To mitigate this, the role and investment of RTÉ and public service broadcasting remains crucial but broader State support is needed. Much of this has been well covered in submissions to the Future of Media Commission and its recommendations which we in the institute welcome. I urge the committee to ensure many of these recommendation are swiftly implemented, especially as mentioned, the local democracy, court reporting and news reporting schemes. I also encourage the committee to ensure the journalism arising from these supports is not pay-walled by news outlets.

There are genuine democratic concerns about segmenting content and audiences between the "will pays" and the "won't pays" or "can't pays". I fully recognise the economic requirements and understand the rationale for pay-walls from news producers. However, given the scope and context of the discussion of this committee, I urge it to consider what has been called the ethical implications of a so-called elite pay-walled press. Ultimately, we should be mindful of further fuelling a two-tier news landscape in which those who are willing or able to pay will see one version of events with increased depth, analysis and verification, whereas the majority receive a tier of information which may lack the same substance, accuracy and rigour. As it stands, high-quality Irish news is still freely available but we should be mindful of industry trends.

As regards specific supports, others present today may outline the practicalities of what could help their respective sectors. I will add one overarching recommendation as a condition for outlets receiving new State supports which is to embed a specific public service obligation around transparency. If we position journalism as a public service, I propose it should have a public service obligation in the form of transparency about newsroom processes and ownership. The media ownership database developed by my colleagues in DCU is an invaluable external resource but it is essential that additional institutional-level information is hosted and provided by the organisations themselves.

We are at a critical juncture for news funding and we have the opportunity to enhance the landscape for both journalism producers and audiences. What this could mean in practical terms, is that recipients of any new State supports would adhere to a code of conduct regarding transparency. On their websites, news outlets should have to make clear certain information about their ownership, editorial structures and processes. These might include funding or owner information; other corporate interests; a list of named editorial staff and their roles; a clear corrections policy; an archive of major online revisions; company policies on branded content or native advertising with clear visual examples; policies on how anonymous sources are used; and employment diversity statements. These are some ideas and further potential transparency indicators can be seen in the newsroom transparency tracker, which I provided a link to in my written submission. I recognise that some outlets are already doing elements of this in an ad hoc manner but there are many shortcomings as we look across the sector.

Ultimately sustainability in the media sector is about more than just financial stability and revenue. That underpins how feasible it is to complete journalistic work but we also need to ensure sustained engagement and trust from the audience side. This symbiosis between an effective, viable news media and an informed, trusting public is at the core of a functioning democratic media system.

Every year I talk to my students in DCU about the shifting news landscape, from the move away from advertising to the influence of social media platforms on both newsrooms and audiences, all of which are challenges for the news sector. I have also taught a class called entrepreneurial journalism, where alternative revenue models are to the fore and students come up with project ideas for sustainable journalism-related businesses. There are many causes for concern in the industry but one positive to finish on is that we still have creative and curious students who, despite the well-documented issues, remain eager and excited to be part of this sector.