:00:24. > :00:29.Hello and welcome to Hearts and Minds. Coming up on the programme:
:00:29. > :00:32.David Ford prepares for his party conference amid what he calls
:00:33. > :00:38.growing anger at the loss of an executive seat. Raising the UUP
:00:38. > :00:44.from the depths. Is Mike the man? As the telly shrinks to one edition,
:00:44. > :00:48.we examine the fate of newspapers in a digital world.
:00:48. > :00:53.The Alliance Party gathers this weekend for its annual shindig but
:00:53. > :00:58.there are stirrings of discontent in the ranks. The leader himself
:00:58. > :01:05.talks about the party's anger about the abolishment of the Department
:01:05. > :01:09.of Education and Learning. Justice Minister, welcome to the
:01:09. > :01:13.programme. Surely the party council refusing
:01:13. > :01:19.to put you forward for the job would be the greatest case of
:01:19. > :01:22.cutting off your nose to spite your face? I think we have to look at
:01:22. > :01:28.what the situation is. The Minister for Employment and unlearning has
:01:28. > :01:34.been doing a good job, yet we have to cut a key department at a
:01:34. > :01:37.significant time of difficulty. That looks like - towards us or
:01:37. > :01:42.vandalism towards the department. We need to do it in a senseable way
:01:42. > :01:46.not chopping off. If it wasn't your seat that was at risk... It wasn't.
:01:46. > :01:50.The party seat. The fundamental part about it is last year we got
:01:50. > :01:54.an increase in the Assembly backed up by a significant increase in
:01:54. > :01:58.votes. As a result of that we got an entitlement of one seat.
:01:58. > :02:02.bring you from seven to eight. got the entitlement to one out of
:02:02. > :02:06.ten. It is now proposed to fix the constitution to take away that
:02:06. > :02:10.entitlement. So there need to be guarantees given to how the issue
:02:10. > :02:12.will be handled for our other department if that is to happen. I
:02:12. > :02:17.don't believe we should be abolishing it at this point. I
:02:17. > :02:22.think we should be looking at a sensible rationalisation of all
:02:22. > :02:26.departments. We don't need to carve up DEL between the Sinn Fein and
:02:26. > :02:30.the DUP departments which was the original proposal. Those things
:02:30. > :02:34.should be discussed rationally, not just an attempt to do us down.
:02:34. > :02:38.it rational for your party to say we're just going to take our ball
:02:38. > :02:42.away and our other Minister away if you don't play the way we want to?
:02:42. > :02:48.What's rational about that? It's entirely rational for to us say if
:02:48. > :02:50.we don't have the opportunity to contribute in the way the
:02:50. > :02:56.electorate said we should have that opportunity, that's our position.
:02:56. > :03:02.You still have one seat. You couldn't ever claim you were
:03:02. > :03:07.underrepresented. No. We made a specific - whoever was elected the
:03:07. > :03:11.Minister - it wasn't necessarily going to be an Alliance Minister -
:03:11. > :03:17.so that the proportions worked out right. That was a sensible way of
:03:18. > :03:21.adapting to it. That wasn't us seeking extra representation. We're
:03:21. > :03:26.saying we want proportionate entitlements guaranteed the same as
:03:26. > :03:30.any other party has theirs guaranteeed. Even if the seat is
:03:30. > :03:34.appointed in a different way? It is an electoral process a part of the
:03:34. > :03:39.electoral system whereas your appointment as Justice Minister is
:03:39. > :03:43.a cross-community appointment, not the first thing, is it And the
:03:43. > :03:47.Deputy First Minister and Junior Ministers are appointed differently.
:03:47. > :03:49.We have four different ways of appointing Ministers. We should
:03:49. > :03:55.have had proportionality all the way through.
:03:55. > :04:02.If you say "I want guarantees that I'm going to have security of
:04:02. > :04:05.tenure and if I don't get those, I am going to resign," that seems
:04:05. > :04:09.nonsensical. No. What would be the point in any Minister remaining
:04:09. > :04:13.when they have shown they can rig the constitution to remove my
:04:13. > :04:17.colleague? Why would I remain to be removed at whatever point they
:04:17. > :04:20.choose to move me? Why do you say rigging the constitution? It's a
:04:20. > :04:25.reorganisation which you yourself say is sensible. No. It's the start
:04:25. > :04:28.of a process. No, it's not the start of a process. The process
:04:28. > :04:31.should be an all-inclusive process which would look to make the eight
:04:31. > :04:36.departments we need come together on the same timescale with a
:04:36. > :04:39.rational process to deliver, not on a whim decide to abolish one
:04:39. > :04:44.department. What would happen if the Ulster Unionists worked away to
:04:44. > :04:47.vote away the Assembly or the Executive? Would they have to scrap
:04:47. > :04:50.another department because that would be a way of ensuring they
:04:50. > :04:56.removed our entitlement then? This is not a rational or sensible
:04:56. > :05:00.process. This is simply vandalism. I come back to it, though - it's
:05:00. > :05:04.not possible that your party would - your party council would say
:05:04. > :05:10.we'll not put David Ford forward - it's stupid, isn't it? It would be
:05:10. > :05:12.entirely possible if there is no option for an Alliance Minister to
:05:12. > :05:16.carry out Alliance policies in a key department - if you're left
:05:16. > :05:20.there as a prisoner of other people - it would be back to what they
:05:20. > :05:24.were attempting to impose on us in the first place. I didn't accept
:05:24. > :05:27.that there would be guaranteed of how the process would work. If that
:05:27. > :05:34.agreement is being torn up, there are serious questions as to whether
:05:34. > :05:38.I should remain. Some say you have already shown yourself to be a
:05:38. > :05:43.prisoner because when Peter Robinson said you - they were going
:05:43. > :05:48.to abolish prison systems you backtracked. I didn't. If you
:05:48. > :05:55.apologised to anyone for the way you phrased something in the
:05:55. > :05:59.Assembly. I simply talked about what had gone on before my watch in
:05:59. > :06:03.the Prison Association and the NAO. Which you said was an operational
:06:03. > :06:07.matter? It was at that time. That was the way it was being discussed
:06:07. > :06:12.operationally. It's clear if you look at the information which was
:06:12. > :06:15.discussed to Jim Alastair under FOI I said this was not the time to be
:06:15. > :06:19.tinkering with emblems because there were fundamental issues of
:06:19. > :06:23.reform around the Prison Service which were more important... They
:06:23. > :06:30.were saying you were a prisoner of the DUP - Sinn Fein alliance.
:06:30. > :06:34.People said a lot of other things whether Peter Robinson should
:06:34. > :06:40.threaten to resign over a cap badge. You talked about the Alliance
:06:40. > :06:44.election. You gained one seat and 14 seats at council level. But you
:06:44. > :06:48.had talked before that at last party's conference about making a
:06:48. > :06:54.breakthrough. You had hoped to get a lot more seats than that.
:06:54. > :06:58.never hoped to get a lot more seats. A few more. We were a couple of
:06:58. > :07:02.others - there were a couple of others we were within a whisker of
:07:02. > :07:05.getting. What we got was what we set - Mance through the proportion
:07:05. > :07:08.system - an entitlement to a Minister under the current rules
:07:08. > :07:11.that operate. That was a significant step forward for a
:07:11. > :07:15.party which hadn't been in that position under the three previous
:07:15. > :07:20.elections. While others had been going down, we were going up.
:07:20. > :07:24.you didn't do as you'd hoped you would do. I am asking if you have
:07:24. > :07:27.peaked. How many more Ministers than two did you think we were
:07:28. > :07:31.expecting? I have no idea. You might have liked ten. You talked
:07:31. > :07:35.about getting... We talked about... A breakthrough in a number of areas
:07:35. > :07:38.that didn't happen. That's my point. We talked about getting a second
:07:38. > :07:42.Minister, and we got one. We talked about a significant increase in
:07:42. > :07:45.votes, and we got a 50% increase in votes. We talked about a
:07:45. > :07:49.significant increase in councillors and got a 50% increase in
:07:49. > :07:54.councilors. We talked about getting two or three gains. We actually got
:07:54. > :08:01.one and had two very narrow misses. Where is the growth to come from?
:08:01. > :08:06.You didn't grow at all west of the ban which was another prophesy you
:08:06. > :08:12.made. In half of Northern Ireland we had a third of the party in or
:08:12. > :08:19.around greater Belfast. We have seats in places like Coleraine and
:08:19. > :08:24.Craig avenueon, half of west of the Ban, Banbridge, Ballymena. Place we
:08:24. > :08:28.weren't represented before we are represented. We also fought
:08:29. > :08:33.campaigns seriously in a number of other places, like in Scone. That
:08:33. > :08:37.was a sign of a party motivated to put workers on the streets. Indeed,
:08:37. > :08:41.it was those votes and those western and southern constituencies
:08:41. > :08:45.which helped guarantee Stephen Ferry's seat at the executive table.
:08:45. > :08:49.With your Justice Minister hat on and the Prime Minister and a
:08:49. > :08:55.hundred plus MPs have said they're not happy with the Attorney General
:08:55. > :08:57.taking action against Peter Hain over scandalising the court with
:08:57. > :09:01.remarks he made in his autobiography. Do you think David
:09:01. > :09:05.Cameron is right that this is a wasted, foolish action? I think the
:09:05. > :09:10.way in which Peter Hain referred to the actions of a judge with which
:09:10. > :09:14.he disagreed were inappropriate in the way he did it. The precise
:09:14. > :09:18.legal actions the Attorney General is taking I can't comment on.
:09:18. > :09:22.You're a politician. I say to you I am a politician... David Cameron
:09:22. > :09:27.has come out and said it's wrong. Last year I signed warrants to
:09:27. > :09:30.appoint a number of QCs. Some of those I appointed had taken part in
:09:30. > :09:34.the campaign against the legal aid reforms I was making. I must say in
:09:34. > :09:39.almost the same terminology as Peter Hain used, I thought there
:09:39. > :09:45.was a certain irony about it as I signed the warrant to appoint them
:09:45. > :09:49.but didn't ring up the Lord Chancellor and said, "Can I get out
:09:49. > :09:53.of this" I thought there was a job to be done. You support the action
:09:53. > :09:59.of the Attorney General? No, I said specifically there a few minutes
:09:59. > :10:01.ago... I'm not sure what you said. Explain it for me. Maybe if you
:10:01. > :10:05.stopped interrupting... If you would explain it for me more
:10:05. > :10:09.carefully. I said I am not a lawyer and I don't understand the precise
:10:09. > :10:13.legal challenge. I am not sure the 120 MPs are lawyers. They have
:10:13. > :10:17.taken a position. I am asking you to. You're actually interrupting me
:10:17. > :10:21.again, Noel! I made it quite clear I was not a lawyer and couldn't go
:10:21. > :10:24.into the detail of what the Attorney General was saying. I also
:10:24. > :10:28.made it quite clear that I can understand what appeared to me as a
:10:28. > :10:32.politician to be the inappropriate way in which not simply an initial
:10:32. > :10:38.decision by a judge but a behaviour as a judge was called into
:10:38. > :10:42.question... Understanding it tells me you don't support the action of
:10:42. > :10:46.Hain or not... For the third time... You said you understood it. You
:10:46. > :10:50.didn't say you supported or opposed it. For the third time I'll say, I
:10:50. > :10:53.am not a lawyer. I don't know the detail of the legal action that the
:10:53. > :10:56.Attorney General is taking, so I am not going to say whether the legal
:10:56. > :10:59.action is correct or not. As some people might say you should, but
:11:00. > :11:02.we'll leave it there. No, I have no responsibility to the Attorney
:11:02. > :11:08.General, Noel, and I shouldn't have any responsibility to the Attorney
:11:08. > :11:11.General, so there is no reason why as Minister of Justice I should.
:11:11. > :11:15.You might have an interest in it but you clearly don't. I have made
:11:15. > :11:18.it clear I have an interesting, but I also have no direct legal
:11:18. > :11:27.responsibility for it. Perhaps if you would represent what I said, it
:11:27. > :11:33.would help. Thank you. Just as Titanic fatigue threatens
:11:33. > :11:37.to set in, reports come in of another Belfast flagship going down.
:11:37. > :11:41.Tomorrow night another evening edition of the Belfast Telegraph
:11:41. > :11:48.will slip beneath the surface of the icey waters that is publishing
:11:48. > :11:54.and settle on the sea floor of journalistic history. Built in 1870,
:11:54. > :11:59.the grand old lady once believed to be unsinkable ran into massive
:11:59. > :12:02.competition from electronic media and suffered irreparable damage as
:12:02. > :12:09.a result. Job losses seem inevitable. For those of us who
:12:09. > :12:18.grew up with the newspaper dropping through the post every day, it's
:12:18. > :12:23.sad news. News is now electronic, instant and free.
:12:23. > :12:26.Meanwhile, the UUP, who once ruled the waves here before their own
:12:26. > :12:33.tragic night to remember in their own tragic election of 2005 is
:12:33. > :12:36.determined to make a comeback. Raising the Titanic springs to mind.
:12:36. > :12:40.Mike Nesbitt has persuaded the party leader to return as chairman
:12:40. > :12:46.in the hope his political experience along with Mike's media
:12:46. > :12:49.know-how will see the UUP resurface as a major player. Mr Nesbitt is
:12:49. > :12:53.still somewhat of an unknown quantity politically but Ulster
:12:53. > :12:59.Unionists have not necessarily suffered from a glut of charismatic
:12:59. > :13:03.leaders in the past. Having the ability to talk to a TV camera
:13:04. > :13:08.without looking like he was facing a major firing squad is a step
:13:08. > :13:13.forward. In the early days, Stormont was a bit like a toddler
:13:13. > :13:16.learning to walk - a few uncertain steps followed by collapse into
:13:16. > :13:19.sectarian politics again. Despite the economic gloom, there are
:13:19. > :13:23.encouraging signs of a more confident, responsibility approach
:13:23. > :13:27.to Government. This Assembly that now embarks on trade missions to
:13:27. > :13:33.the Middle East and India and fosters closer ties with China is
:13:33. > :13:36.light years away from its bad old days of sectarian squabbling and
:13:36. > :13:40.infantile name calling which passed for politics here. There is
:13:40. > :13:46.evidence we're eventually beginning to recognise our assets. We have
:13:46. > :13:50.discovered natural gas, and the Assembly is considering giving
:13:50. > :13:53.Lochgilphead, the largest fresh water lake in the UK into public
:13:53. > :13:57.ownership. Water is something we take for granted here, but as the
:13:57. > :14:02.drought in Britain becomes acute, it may become our greatest asset.
:14:02. > :14:04.Perhaps the day is coming that every day it rains, it rains
:14:04. > :14:08.pennies from heaven. Good night.
:14:08. > :14:12.Now, read all about it - during the morning at least. The demise of the
:14:12. > :14:15.afternoon edition of the Belfast Telegraph is the latest sign of
:14:15. > :14:20.decline in the newspaper industry, which it seems is under assault
:14:20. > :14:26.from all sides. Vital advertising income is under threat with the
:14:26. > :14:29.Assembly threatening to remove its adverts from all our local dailies.
:14:29. > :14:35.Julia Paul reports. # Extra, extra
:14:35. > :14:42.# Read all about it # Once upon a time, the newspaper was
:14:43. > :14:47.king of the media. Thousands bought a paper on the way to work, and the
:14:47. > :14:51.evening paper on the way home. Of course, this being Northern Ireland,
:14:51. > :14:56.each community had to have its own newspaper, and when it came to
:14:56. > :15:02.advertising Government jobs or public notices, by law they had to
:15:02. > :15:05.appear in all three. But now we get our news and our job adverts from a
:15:05. > :15:09.variety of sources. Newspaper circulation has been falling for
:15:09. > :15:14.decades, yet it still costs �4.5 million a year for the Government
:15:14. > :15:20.to advertise in our three main daily newspapers, and the Executive
:15:20. > :15:24.says that's lot of taxpayers' money. The Government has already reduced
:15:24. > :15:30.its entire advertising bill from �18 million a year to �12 million.
:15:30. > :15:33.But the Executive wants to go further. It plans to open up
:15:33. > :15:36.classified advertising to competition, to change the
:15:36. > :15:43.legislation so public notices could be advertised on the internet and
:15:43. > :15:48.to introduce tighter controls on campaign advertising, like the road
:15:48. > :15:52.safety adverts on TV and radio. Not surprisingly, the newspaper editors
:15:52. > :15:56.aren't happy. It costs a reasonable amount of money but I wouldn't say
:15:56. > :15:59.a huge amount of money. We see what the Government spend on consultants
:15:59. > :16:03.and in many other areas. Essentially what they're doing is
:16:03. > :16:06.purchasing a valuable service from the newspapers which provide this
:16:06. > :16:12.very extensive platform for the Government to get their message
:16:12. > :16:19.across. If this happens, it will be a tremendous blow to the quality of
:16:19. > :16:27.our papers and our journalism because we rely upon that to pay
:16:27. > :16:31.the salaries, really, of those who work for us and who put the issues
:16:31. > :16:35.of local democracy out into the public eye. You know, it's almost
:16:35. > :16:39.being put across as if it's a charity case. This advertising
:16:39. > :16:42.works. You know, let's not beat around the bush here. This
:16:42. > :16:45.advertising actually works, and when you put a Government
:16:45. > :16:50.advertisement - be that a job or a public notice - people see it. They
:16:50. > :16:54.see it because they trust the titles. Meanwhile, the National
:16:54. > :17:00.Union of Journalists is worried the move could mean job losses.
:17:00. > :17:04.estimate that was done by some of the newspapers themselves was that
:17:04. > :17:08.if these new measures for Government advertising were to be
:17:08. > :17:12.introduced, then we could see maybe a fifth of the current titles in
:17:12. > :17:18.Northern Ireland disappearing overnight, and there would
:17:18. > :17:21.therefore be a risk that there could be maybe over 500 jobs at
:17:21. > :17:26.risk altogether, and that would include some not directly connected
:17:26. > :17:31.with newspapers. It's public money paying for these
:17:31. > :17:36.adverts, and in the current climate, this is hard to justify. But if
:17:36. > :17:41.classified advertising goes out to tender, the NUJ says that process
:17:41. > :17:45.needs to be transparent and free from political influence. From what
:17:45. > :17:50.I'm hearing, there are some journalists who feel that they are
:17:51. > :17:54.being bullied in their newspapers to tow the line in a certain
:17:54. > :17:59.political direction and in the way they're covering stories and that
:17:59. > :18:03.the threat is hanging over them that if they don't give favorable
:18:03. > :18:07.coverage on certain political stories that maybe their papers are
:18:07. > :18:11.likely to lose out when it comes to those contracts for Government
:18:11. > :18:15.advertising. The Executive denies any
:18:15. > :18:19.accusations of putting pressure on newspapers. From my own experience,
:18:19. > :18:23.I have had no direct involvement or direct pressure put upon myself,
:18:23. > :18:28.but in conversation with colleagues and with other journalists, some of
:18:28. > :18:35.those people certainly would believe that pressure has been
:18:35. > :18:39.applied and a big stick has been wielded in that way over this issue.
:18:39. > :18:44.I think there is plenty of criticism from politicians of the
:18:44. > :18:47.Belfast Telegraph every day, every week, frankly, but clearly in a
:18:47. > :18:50.small country where there is this patronage of that amount of money,
:18:50. > :18:55.it could lead to the suspicion - let's just say as much as that -
:18:55. > :19:01.that might happen. I am sure there is great maturity in the corridors
:19:01. > :19:04.of power at Stormont. I am sure that's the last message Peter
:19:04. > :19:08.Robinson and Martin McGuinness would want to go out. But I am sure
:19:08. > :19:11.they'd want to go through with their advisors the consequences of
:19:11. > :19:14.what this could all mean because we're not here to provide a PR
:19:14. > :19:19.service for the Government. They have 161 press officers who do a
:19:20. > :19:24.very good job for them in that respect. We're here to report to
:19:24. > :19:29.our readers, but also to reflect the difficulties that'll inevitably
:19:29. > :19:32.come along in public life. While it's a long time since the heyday
:19:32. > :19:37.of the newspaper, there are still around 60 titles in Northern
:19:37. > :19:42.Ireland, but one former editor says competition from the internet is a
:19:42. > :19:46.major challenge for journalism. Anybodys, every ordinary citizen,
:19:46. > :19:50.should be really worried about the demise of journalism, that this
:19:50. > :19:54.trend is producing. You know, the big problem we've got at the moment
:19:54. > :19:59.is we've got newspapers - news information coming on to
:19:59. > :20:03.multiplatforms - on to the internet without actually having a means to
:20:03. > :20:06.derive proper revenue from that. That's a crisis for journalism.
:20:06. > :20:10.It's a crisis for newspapers, but it's a crisis to which at the
:20:10. > :20:14.moment nobody has found an answer. Julia Paul reporting.
:20:14. > :20:18.Difficult as it might be for people of a certain generation to imagine
:20:18. > :20:24.a world without the rustle of news print, there are plenty of prophets
:20:24. > :20:34.of doom foreseeing that world in a not-too-distance future. Can the
:20:34. > :20:36.
:20:37. > :20:40.hard copy be saved? We have two guests with us. Do you lie awake at
:20:40. > :20:45.night wondering how you're going to arrest the decline of newspapers?
:20:45. > :20:47.Lots of things keep me awake. I think newspapers cannot only
:20:47. > :20:52.survive but prosper in a changing world. We have to accept there is
:20:52. > :20:56.less people out there reading newspaper, but there is less people
:20:56. > :21:00.out there watching mainstream TV and less people going out to vote,
:21:00. > :21:05.so there are changes we have to cope with. There are less people
:21:05. > :21:08.reading the Irish newspapers than 25 years ago or five years ago. We
:21:08. > :21:15.have a loyal audience. Newspapers hold a special role in people's
:21:15. > :21:19.affections, but also have a very definitive role to play in terms of
:21:19. > :21:24.examining the news - examining features, looking at sport and
:21:24. > :21:29.business and other -- which other areas aren't necessarily equipped
:21:29. > :21:33.to do. It may be an increasingly mature readership which isn't
:21:33. > :21:37.necessarily a bad thing, but people will turn to a newspaper. They may
:21:37. > :21:42.not have as much time as they did previously. The economics may have
:21:42. > :21:46.to change, but people have been predicting the demise of the
:21:46. > :21:51.newspapers since the wireless was invented. Do you think that the
:21:51. > :21:54.industry has a plan? Yes, I do. It's a matter of the role of the
:21:54. > :21:57.newspapers. That's what the publishers have to work out is what
:21:57. > :22:01.their role is going to be going forward. I'm confident there's role
:22:01. > :22:06.for print, but you've got to work out what it's going to be, what
:22:06. > :22:10.it's going to contribute, and where does it fit into the readers'
:22:10. > :22:14.lives? I am confident they can do that. But in a world of digital
:22:14. > :22:18.media, with mobile platforms, whatever they are, getting more and
:22:18. > :22:21.more important, where is that newspaper moment going to be, do
:22:21. > :22:26.you think? I think it's going to be in breadth and depth. If you look
:22:26. > :22:31.at the newspapers today or local newspapers - Irish news included -
:22:32. > :22:36.there are storys there which maybe didn't even touch in terms of
:22:36. > :22:41.headlines last night on broadcast media, but are there in detail and
:22:41. > :22:45.print this morning, like car parking charges explained in great
:22:45. > :22:49.detail in several of the papers today - and I think that's an add-
:22:50. > :22:54.on that readers will want. So I think the online and the breaking
:22:54. > :23:00.news developments could actually be harnessed to drive people to print
:23:00. > :23:03.the next day, which is a change around from where we have been
:23:03. > :23:08.before. Alan, do you think these men are dinosaurs? No, I think we
:23:08. > :23:12.all kind of work in the same kind of ecosystem. There is a certain
:23:12. > :23:18.amount of bloggers that rely on newsprint in the same way they rely
:23:18. > :23:23.on radio and TV as well to talk about and commentate on what others
:23:23. > :23:25.are saying. And stories that come out on blogs first will then be
:23:26. > :23:28.picked up by journalists who actually have the time to look into
:23:28. > :23:32.a story. It's interesting the things that'll appear on my blog
:23:32. > :23:36.and will actually make it into the newspapers or radio programmes
:23:36. > :23:40.within a couple of days and develop into a proper story with a bit more
:23:40. > :23:43.detail and rigour. One of the elements is trust, of course. The
:23:43. > :23:48.great institutions from the New York Times, the Irish Times, the
:23:48. > :23:53.Irish News, the Newsletter, these are institutions people trusted.
:23:53. > :23:58.How did - or how can people trust a blogger? I think trust is earned.
:23:58. > :24:01.It's over time either by reputation or by just the quality of what you
:24:01. > :24:05.do and the fact it chimes with people. They agree with it, then
:24:05. > :24:10.they start to trust. If other - within blogs, a lot of people tend
:24:10. > :24:14.to refer to each other, and that builds a kind of network of trust
:24:14. > :24:17.and a network of accountability to each other as well. People online
:24:17. > :24:22.are very quick to say, that's rubbish or wrong. It's very fast
:24:22. > :24:26.for them to comment back - slightly harder for a newspaper to be
:24:26. > :24:30.critiqueed except maybe in the letters page. How much of an eye do
:24:30. > :24:34.you keep on the blogs? How much do you think there is an actual
:24:34. > :24:37.matching of interests? We do our level best. Certainly I spend a lot
:24:37. > :24:40.of time going through different websites. I see his blogs. They
:24:40. > :24:43.have lot of credibility because they're researched. He takes a lot
:24:43. > :24:46.of care and attention in what he does. Not everybody does. There is
:24:46. > :24:49.a contrast there with newspapers. We have a lot to learn from the
:24:49. > :24:54.instant opinions which are out there, but the more reflective
:24:54. > :24:58.approach is also very important to us among our columnists and news
:24:58. > :25:00.reporters. I think newspapers do still set the agenda in many ways.
:25:00. > :25:05.The broadcasters will follow up many, many stories which first
:25:05. > :25:07.appear in newspapers. Some of the things we do in particularly health,
:25:07. > :25:11.particularly education, particularly security and of course
:25:11. > :25:14.sport as well are going to be followed up - are going to form the
:25:14. > :25:18.basis for a wider debate. I think that's a very important role
:25:18. > :25:22.newspapers have to play and will continue to do so. If things are
:25:22. > :25:26.changing, we'll look at what others are doing. Hopefully we learn from
:25:26. > :25:31.that. Maybe they learn from us as well. Newspapers have to make money,
:25:31. > :25:35.of course. That's what they are primarily - money-making machines.
:25:35. > :25:37.Someone talked about the three- legged stool that supported the
:25:37. > :25:41.newspaper industry. That was advertising, circulation and a
:25:41. > :25:46.cheap paper. Now, that is becoming a monostool very quickly, isn't it?
:25:46. > :25:50.It is, yeah. All of those things are under pressure, but I think you
:25:50. > :25:56.have hit on it with the word "credibility". The printed word in
:25:56. > :26:01.a reputable newspaper still has the lead on credibility. And the
:26:01. > :26:07.undoing of blogging and social networking will be its lack of
:26:07. > :26:10.credibility, and there's been a number of mistakes and erroneous
:26:10. > :26:13.reports online which are undermining the credibility of that
:26:13. > :26:18.medium, and newspapers have got to play into that. You know, if you
:26:18. > :26:23.want the real story - the inside track, the credible approach, it's
:26:23. > :26:27.going to be in print, and to me, that's what the publishers have to
:26:27. > :26:31.grab. I suspect that old media and new media all make mistakes. Even
:26:31. > :26:38.on this island in the last year... Yes, but a newspaper is accountable
:26:38. > :26:42.when it makes a mistake. A blogger isn't. A blogger is accountable to
:26:42. > :26:45.the same defamation and libel laws in that way. We can also get caught
:26:45. > :26:49.looking stupid. That ayour reputation. The one thing all of us
:26:49. > :26:52.in different types of media are conscious of is - being local is
:26:52. > :26:56.important, actually connecting with community. It's something papers,
:26:56. > :26:59.particularly on a weekly basis, do very well around Northern Ireland.
:26:59. > :27:02.It's something bloggers do well if they come from a community and talk
:27:02. > :27:06.about it. That's probably where some of the trust and reputation
:27:06. > :27:11.and some of the future comes from - being a trusted source. Newspapers
:27:11. > :27:14.have to make money. How can they make money in a digital age?
:27:14. > :27:19.they move into the digital age, we're going to have to find a way
:27:19. > :27:24.of making online pay for itself. You know, the Daily Mail group has
:27:24. > :27:28.just announced �10 million profits from its Mail Online service, the
:27:28. > :27:34.biggest in the world. The other newspapers are going to have to do
:27:34. > :27:37.the same. You've got to make online pay. As Google would say, you have
:27:37. > :27:41.to monetise it every time somebody calls in on it. How are you
:27:41. > :27:48.progressing with that? We have a subscription model for our website
:27:48. > :27:54.which we're examining. We may well move forward. Where we have an
:27:54. > :27:59.audience online tends to be brief and fleeting. The figures show that
:27:59. > :28:02.people read newspapers longer, which is great for journalists. It
:28:02. > :28:06.gives you chance to read it in more depth. Newspapers will have to come
:28:06. > :28:09.to terms with online operations and finding a way of making money out
:28:09. > :28:13.of it. But there is a credibility for newspapers, and I think
:28:13. > :28:15.newspapers will hopefully have a role to play for many years to come.
:28:15. > :28:19.Gentlemen, thank you very much indeed. That's where we must leave
:28:19. > :28:29.it this time around. We'll be back next week at the usual times. I
:28:29. > :28:33.