Rupert Murdoch’s victory in securing the Wall Street Journal has left the Financial Times scrambling to form alliances to compete with the overwhelming synergies that News Corporation’s global reach will provide.
Meanwhile a lesser-known entity, the UK’s Guardian, is making some strategic decisions of its own: eyeing a US push in an apparent attempt to capitalize on current perceptions of corporate influence in the news media.
In a recent interview with the Financial Times, Carolyn McCall, chief executive of the Guardian Media Group, shared some telling insights about the company’s strategy:
“We are trying to be a 24/7 global news and comment provider,” she told the Financial Times.
“That is a step change and it requires a lot of thinking.”
And it is guided thinking, she adds: “At least we have a compass: we know what we are there for. It’s about protecting the independence, financial and editorial, of Guardian journalism. It’s about being the world’s leading liberal voice.”
This sounds a lofty ambition, but Ms McCall says it is grounded not only in the long traditions of the Scott Trust – the independent body founded in 1936 and which controls GMG as a private company – but also in a perceived audience demand.
“I said this at the last World Newspaper Conference and it was amazing the number of journalists who came up to me afterwards, from Russia, from Poland, from Korea, from all over, saying: ‘Talk more about that’. It has got real traction.”
The article emphasizes the well-known fact that most news and media executives are beholden to shareholders, and have their decisions constrained by such. The Guardian, however, is owned by a public trust, thereby eliminating much of the pressure, bias, and underlying favoritism.
Could independent or non-corporate owned media entities like the Guardian see an upsurge in online readership as more and more readers become concerned that they are consuming “tainted” news?
Financial Times (reg req’d)
Facebook
Twitter
Digg
Reddit
StumbleUpon
