Latest news with #ConstructiveInstitute
The Age
28-07-2025
- Politics
- The Age
Good journalism reveals problems and just asks more questions
'Stop anyone in your country and ask, 'do you need more news faster?' They will say, 'no, we don't. We need better news. I need to know which people have the best solution to the problems I have'.' The world has always been beset by bad news. Today it seems unusually beset. There is a cascade of concatenating crises on a grand scale. Trump is dismantling the global order, Putin wages war in Europe, climate change is increasingly destructive, there's the prospect of war in Asia. All of this is aggravated by 'social' media, exacerbating the existing problems and inflicting its own new harms. This complex has been called variously the polycrisis, pluricrisis, or socio-ecological crisis. People everywhere are depressed by continuous exposure to the news, punch-drunk just by trying to follow events. Kate Torney, news director of the ABC until 2015, speaks of news fatigue among audiences: 'When I stepped away from journalism, I gained a much clearer understanding of why some people are so overwhelmed. The focus on conflict and negativity can be exhausting and leaves audiences feeling helpless.' Torney took the leadership of the Constructive Institute's Asia Pacific hub, based in Melbourne's Monash University, eight months ago, working closely with Haagerup. She, too, is working to be part of the solution. News titles 'should be the best friend of people', says Haagerup. 'What is that? Is it somebody who constantly calls you up and says 'the castle is on fire'? Or is it someone constantly complaining about everything? Is it somebody who wants to make money out of you? People don't think we are good friends.' All well and good, but surely this is a utopian project. How can he change the instinctive human interest in bad news, in what's going wrong, in the aberrant? 'News is something out of the ordinary,' he says. 'What if everyone is fighting? With everyone fighting, if some people are living peacefully, tell us how. That's intriguing.' He has a point. 'People in towns and cities with the same problem you have, how have they fixed it? People want to read that story.' He offers an example. South Korea solved the problem of masses queueing for COVID vaccinations, with the risk of infecting one another, by applying the McDonald's drive-through concept. The world followed its lead. He lists a sample of eight Nordic and German news outlets that have started to systematically apply constructive approaches to their journalism. For instance, the Norwegian national broadcaster, NRK, changed the format of its regular political radio debate, says Torney. Instead of a standard clash with a winner and loser, the producers required the debate participants to return to the program at a later date with three points of agreement. 'The impact was extraordinary,' reports Torney. 'It went down really well with the audience.' Loading The Herald 's editor, Bevan Shields, concurs that while reporting of hard news will always be essential, readers often say they don't want to feel depressed by the time they've finished reading the news: 'They want light and shade, and there is an increasing demand for constructive, solutions-focused journalism as part of that.' The Herald and its Melbourne twin, The Age, already apply the principle tentatively. For example, the story last week of an education case study – how a failing public primary school at The Entrance on the NSW Central Coast was turned into a success. Liam Mannix, science reporter for the two papers, was given a fellowship at the Constructive Institute in Denmark last year. It inspired him to tell a number of constructive yarns, including the one headlined: ' How Tom walked away from knee pain without expensive surgery. ' Potentially life-changing for millions. Shields says that environment coverage is another example. 'Yes, there is a political contest to cover, but readers also want information about practical ways to help the environment.' 'What's in it for me?' ask the shareholders. 'There is also a commercial benefit for newsrooms if we can do this well,' says Shields. Subscribers demand new offerings. Constructive journalism can add value, he says. Some of the Nordic outlets can attest to its commercial success. Haagerup recounts the way that fast food invaded Denmark some 30 years ago. With hamburger and pizza and kebab shops lining the streets, some Danish chefs got together to mourn the takeover by cheap, fast, unhealthy food. They proposed a solution – to restore restaurant dining with wild, local and seasonal ingredients. They founded NOMA in Copenhagen. It revolutionised fine dining worldwide. Even McDonald's in Denmark introduced gourmet-style hamburgers.
Sydney Morning Herald
28-07-2025
- Politics
- Sydney Morning Herald
Good journalism reveals problems and just asks more questions
'Stop anyone in your country and ask, 'do you need more news faster?' They will say, 'no, we don't. We need better news. I need to know which people have the best solution to the problems I have'.' The world has always been beset by bad news. Today it seems unusually beset. There is a cascade of concatenating crises on a grand scale. Trump is dismantling the global order, Putin wages war in Europe, climate change is increasingly destructive, there's the prospect of war in Asia. All of this is aggravated by 'social' media, exacerbating the existing problems and inflicting its own new harms. This complex has been called variously the polycrisis, pluricrisis, or socio-ecological crisis. People everywhere are depressed by continuous exposure to the news, punch-drunk just by trying to follow events. Kate Torney, news director of the ABC until 2015, speaks of news fatigue among audiences: 'When I stepped away from journalism, I gained a much clearer understanding of why some people are so overwhelmed. The focus on conflict and negativity can be exhausting and leaves audiences feeling helpless.' Torney took the leadership of the Constructive Institute's Asia Pacific hub, based in Melbourne's Monash University, eight months ago, working closely with Haagerup. She, too, is working to be part of the solution. News titles 'should be the best friend of people', says Haagerup. 'What is that? Is it somebody who constantly calls you up and says 'the castle is on fire'? Or is it someone constantly complaining about everything? Is it somebody who wants to make money out of you? People don't think we are good friends.' All well and good, but surely this is a utopian project. How can he change the instinctive human interest in bad news, in what's going wrong, in the aberrant? 'News is something out of the ordinary,' he says. 'What if everyone is fighting? With everyone fighting, if some people are living peacefully, tell us how. That's intriguing.' He has a point. 'People in towns and cities with the same problem you have, how have they fixed it? People want to read that story.' He offers an example. South Korea solved the problem of masses queueing for COVID vaccinations, with the risk of infecting one another, by applying the McDonald's drive-through concept. The world followed its lead. He lists a sample of eight Nordic and German news outlets that have started to systematically apply constructive approaches to their journalism. For instance, the Norwegian national broadcaster, NRK, changed the format of its regular political radio debate, says Torney. Instead of a standard clash with a winner and loser, the producers required the debate participants to return to the program at a later date with three points of agreement. 'The impact was extraordinary,' reports Torney. 'It went down really well with the audience.' Loading The Herald 's editor, Bevan Shields, concurs that while reporting of hard news will always be essential, readers often say they don't want to feel depressed by the time they've finished reading the news: 'They want light and shade, and there is an increasing demand for constructive, solutions-focused journalism as part of that.' The Herald and its Melbourne twin, The Age, already apply the principle tentatively. For example, the story last week of an education case study – how a failing public primary school at The Entrance on the NSW Central Coast was turned into a success. Liam Mannix, science reporter for the two papers, was given a fellowship at the Constructive Institute in Denmark last year. It inspired him to tell a number of constructive yarns, including the one headlined: ' How Tom walked away from knee pain without expensive surgery. ' Potentially life-changing for millions. Shields says that environment coverage is another example. 'Yes, there is a political contest to cover, but readers also want information about practical ways to help the environment.' 'What's in it for me?' ask the shareholders. 'There is also a commercial benefit for newsrooms if we can do this well,' says Shields. Subscribers demand new offerings. Constructive journalism can add value, he says. Some of the Nordic outlets can attest to its commercial success. Haagerup recounts the way that fast food invaded Denmark some 30 years ago. With hamburger and pizza and kebab shops lining the streets, some Danish chefs got together to mourn the takeover by cheap, fast, unhealthy food. They proposed a solution – to restore restaurant dining with wild, local and seasonal ingredients. They founded NOMA in Copenhagen. It revolutionised fine dining worldwide. Even McDonald's in Denmark introduced gourmet-style hamburgers.
The Advertiser
01-07-2025
- Politics
- The Advertiser
News can't go on simply making 'angry people furious'. People will tune out for good
"I've turned off all my news alerts, it's just too much and there's nothing I can do," said a woman to her friend. "Message me if there's something I really need to know." It's a conversation I overheard while in a supermarket queue recently. And it's an increasingly common phenomenon. Even hardened news-passionate journalist friends of mine are struggling to read the news. The University of Canberra recently released its report on digital media which - alarmingly - states that 69 per cent of those surveyed said that they try not to engage with general news coverage. And only 43 per cent of the 2000 people surveyed, said they trust the news. We can't afford to look away. At a time of foment and instability, with the current conflicts in Iran, Gaza and Ukraine, we need to find ways of engaging in the world around us, without feeling overwhelmed. It's time to rethink our approach to news coverage in a bid to rebuild trust in journalism and in evidence-based information. The Constructive Institute in Aarhus, Denmark, has pioneered a journalistic approach which applies a constructive lens to news reporting. Working with journalists and news organisations, via fellowships and partnerships, The Constructive Institute is quietly transforming news in Scandinavia and beyond, while also increasing engagement and trust in news. Put simply, a constructive approach is future and solutions-focused, providing detailed context and nuance, never assuming knowledge. Importantly, it encourages community engagement and dialogue around issues big and small. A news colleague recently quipped that the motto in her newsroom is "We make angry people furious." Constructive journalism is an antidote to that oppositional paradigm of he/she/they said reporting, which adds little beyond inflaming an issue. In many Scandinavian newsrooms, constructive journalism is being deliberately applied, including through innovative formats in which all interviews and debates are solutions-focused. Imagine, and this is happening there, diametrically opposed politicians and stakeholders coming onto a debate program. They are there because they have agreed to a constructive format, focused on moving an issue forward. At the end of the discussion, they must have agreed on several concrete actions towards a solution, with shared accountability for delivery. And there is strong audience input and feedback throughout. Can you imagine any political debate where those are the rules, and that's how it plays out? Where solutions are the goal rather than taking down the opponent at all costs. As one of the news leaders responsible for rolling out this format observed, it has revitalised engagement with the public, and it is a far more rewarding experience for politicians, subject matter experts and those impacted by a particular issue because conflict has been replaced with a focus on outcomes. And - this is key - the interviewees return, months or weeks later, to update the public on their, collective, progress. Accountability in action. What's in it for news organisations? Audiences. According to the Constructive Institute, constructive journalism has led to increased news engagement, according to former Danish news executive and founder of the Constructive Institute, Ulrik Haagrup, interviewed in 2020 by DW News. While Scandinavia is leading the way, Australia is hot on its heels. Every day, across our local platforms, mastheads, news feeds, programs and services there are powerful examples of constructive reporting, with many innovative journalists and news leaders recognising that readers, viewers and listeners are hungry for a new approach to news. At Monash, we have joined with our colleagues in Denmark to expand the work of the Constructive Institute by elevating and learning from the inspiring work already under way here; and through fellowships and partnerships to further explore constructive journalism initiatives in Australia, Asia and the Pacific; and importantly to measure the impact such an editorial shift can have on audiences and on the bottom line for media organisations. Cleverly, the University of Canberra Digital Media Survey asked participants how trust in news could be improved. What they found in many ways reflects what the Constructive Institute is aiming to do to engage and trust in the media there must be more: facts and accuracy (26 per cent), less bias and opinion (24 per cent), more breadth and depth in reporting (17 per cent), greater transparency and accountability (15 per cent), increased verification (9 per cent), and more independence from commercial and political interests (9 per cent). Increased news avoidance is not inevitable. And, frankly, it is dangerous. In times of conflict, we must be informed, and the move towards more constructive journalism can help achieve that. "I've turned off all my news alerts, it's just too much and there's nothing I can do," said a woman to her friend. "Message me if there's something I really need to know." It's a conversation I overheard while in a supermarket queue recently. And it's an increasingly common phenomenon. Even hardened news-passionate journalist friends of mine are struggling to read the news. The University of Canberra recently released its report on digital media which - alarmingly - states that 69 per cent of those surveyed said that they try not to engage with general news coverage. And only 43 per cent of the 2000 people surveyed, said they trust the news. We can't afford to look away. At a time of foment and instability, with the current conflicts in Iran, Gaza and Ukraine, we need to find ways of engaging in the world around us, without feeling overwhelmed. It's time to rethink our approach to news coverage in a bid to rebuild trust in journalism and in evidence-based information. The Constructive Institute in Aarhus, Denmark, has pioneered a journalistic approach which applies a constructive lens to news reporting. Working with journalists and news organisations, via fellowships and partnerships, The Constructive Institute is quietly transforming news in Scandinavia and beyond, while also increasing engagement and trust in news. Put simply, a constructive approach is future and solutions-focused, providing detailed context and nuance, never assuming knowledge. Importantly, it encourages community engagement and dialogue around issues big and small. A news colleague recently quipped that the motto in her newsroom is "We make angry people furious." Constructive journalism is an antidote to that oppositional paradigm of he/she/they said reporting, which adds little beyond inflaming an issue. In many Scandinavian newsrooms, constructive journalism is being deliberately applied, including through innovative formats in which all interviews and debates are solutions-focused. Imagine, and this is happening there, diametrically opposed politicians and stakeholders coming onto a debate program. They are there because they have agreed to a constructive format, focused on moving an issue forward. At the end of the discussion, they must have agreed on several concrete actions towards a solution, with shared accountability for delivery. And there is strong audience input and feedback throughout. Can you imagine any political debate where those are the rules, and that's how it plays out? Where solutions are the goal rather than taking down the opponent at all costs. As one of the news leaders responsible for rolling out this format observed, it has revitalised engagement with the public, and it is a far more rewarding experience for politicians, subject matter experts and those impacted by a particular issue because conflict has been replaced with a focus on outcomes. And - this is key - the interviewees return, months or weeks later, to update the public on their, collective, progress. Accountability in action. What's in it for news organisations? Audiences. According to the Constructive Institute, constructive journalism has led to increased news engagement, according to former Danish news executive and founder of the Constructive Institute, Ulrik Haagrup, interviewed in 2020 by DW News. While Scandinavia is leading the way, Australia is hot on its heels. Every day, across our local platforms, mastheads, news feeds, programs and services there are powerful examples of constructive reporting, with many innovative journalists and news leaders recognising that readers, viewers and listeners are hungry for a new approach to news. At Monash, we have joined with our colleagues in Denmark to expand the work of the Constructive Institute by elevating and learning from the inspiring work already under way here; and through fellowships and partnerships to further explore constructive journalism initiatives in Australia, Asia and the Pacific; and importantly to measure the impact such an editorial shift can have on audiences and on the bottom line for media organisations. Cleverly, the University of Canberra Digital Media Survey asked participants how trust in news could be improved. What they found in many ways reflects what the Constructive Institute is aiming to do to engage and trust in the media there must be more: facts and accuracy (26 per cent), less bias and opinion (24 per cent), more breadth and depth in reporting (17 per cent), greater transparency and accountability (15 per cent), increased verification (9 per cent), and more independence from commercial and political interests (9 per cent). Increased news avoidance is not inevitable. And, frankly, it is dangerous. In times of conflict, we must be informed, and the move towards more constructive journalism can help achieve that. "I've turned off all my news alerts, it's just too much and there's nothing I can do," said a woman to her friend. "Message me if there's something I really need to know." It's a conversation I overheard while in a supermarket queue recently. And it's an increasingly common phenomenon. Even hardened news-passionate journalist friends of mine are struggling to read the news. The University of Canberra recently released its report on digital media which - alarmingly - states that 69 per cent of those surveyed said that they try not to engage with general news coverage. And only 43 per cent of the 2000 people surveyed, said they trust the news. We can't afford to look away. At a time of foment and instability, with the current conflicts in Iran, Gaza and Ukraine, we need to find ways of engaging in the world around us, without feeling overwhelmed. It's time to rethink our approach to news coverage in a bid to rebuild trust in journalism and in evidence-based information. The Constructive Institute in Aarhus, Denmark, has pioneered a journalistic approach which applies a constructive lens to news reporting. Working with journalists and news organisations, via fellowships and partnerships, The Constructive Institute is quietly transforming news in Scandinavia and beyond, while also increasing engagement and trust in news. Put simply, a constructive approach is future and solutions-focused, providing detailed context and nuance, never assuming knowledge. Importantly, it encourages community engagement and dialogue around issues big and small. A news colleague recently quipped that the motto in her newsroom is "We make angry people furious." Constructive journalism is an antidote to that oppositional paradigm of he/she/they said reporting, which adds little beyond inflaming an issue. In many Scandinavian newsrooms, constructive journalism is being deliberately applied, including through innovative formats in which all interviews and debates are solutions-focused. Imagine, and this is happening there, diametrically opposed politicians and stakeholders coming onto a debate program. They are there because they have agreed to a constructive format, focused on moving an issue forward. At the end of the discussion, they must have agreed on several concrete actions towards a solution, with shared accountability for delivery. And there is strong audience input and feedback throughout. Can you imagine any political debate where those are the rules, and that's how it plays out? Where solutions are the goal rather than taking down the opponent at all costs. As one of the news leaders responsible for rolling out this format observed, it has revitalised engagement with the public, and it is a far more rewarding experience for politicians, subject matter experts and those impacted by a particular issue because conflict has been replaced with a focus on outcomes. And - this is key - the interviewees return, months or weeks later, to update the public on their, collective, progress. Accountability in action. What's in it for news organisations? Audiences. According to the Constructive Institute, constructive journalism has led to increased news engagement, according to former Danish news executive and founder of the Constructive Institute, Ulrik Haagrup, interviewed in 2020 by DW News. While Scandinavia is leading the way, Australia is hot on its heels. Every day, across our local platforms, mastheads, news feeds, programs and services there are powerful examples of constructive reporting, with many innovative journalists and news leaders recognising that readers, viewers and listeners are hungry for a new approach to news. At Monash, we have joined with our colleagues in Denmark to expand the work of the Constructive Institute by elevating and learning from the inspiring work already under way here; and through fellowships and partnerships to further explore constructive journalism initiatives in Australia, Asia and the Pacific; and importantly to measure the impact such an editorial shift can have on audiences and on the bottom line for media organisations. Cleverly, the University of Canberra Digital Media Survey asked participants how trust in news could be improved. What they found in many ways reflects what the Constructive Institute is aiming to do to engage and trust in the media there must be more: facts and accuracy (26 per cent), less bias and opinion (24 per cent), more breadth and depth in reporting (17 per cent), greater transparency and accountability (15 per cent), increased verification (9 per cent), and more independence from commercial and political interests (9 per cent). Increased news avoidance is not inevitable. And, frankly, it is dangerous. In times of conflict, we must be informed, and the move towards more constructive journalism can help achieve that. "I've turned off all my news alerts, it's just too much and there's nothing I can do," said a woman to her friend. "Message me if there's something I really need to know." It's a conversation I overheard while in a supermarket queue recently. And it's an increasingly common phenomenon. Even hardened news-passionate journalist friends of mine are struggling to read the news. The University of Canberra recently released its report on digital media which - alarmingly - states that 69 per cent of those surveyed said that they try not to engage with general news coverage. And only 43 per cent of the 2000 people surveyed, said they trust the news. We can't afford to look away. At a time of foment and instability, with the current conflicts in Iran, Gaza and Ukraine, we need to find ways of engaging in the world around us, without feeling overwhelmed. It's time to rethink our approach to news coverage in a bid to rebuild trust in journalism and in evidence-based information. The Constructive Institute in Aarhus, Denmark, has pioneered a journalistic approach which applies a constructive lens to news reporting. Working with journalists and news organisations, via fellowships and partnerships, The Constructive Institute is quietly transforming news in Scandinavia and beyond, while also increasing engagement and trust in news. Put simply, a constructive approach is future and solutions-focused, providing detailed context and nuance, never assuming knowledge. Importantly, it encourages community engagement and dialogue around issues big and small. A news colleague recently quipped that the motto in her newsroom is "We make angry people furious." Constructive journalism is an antidote to that oppositional paradigm of he/she/they said reporting, which adds little beyond inflaming an issue. In many Scandinavian newsrooms, constructive journalism is being deliberately applied, including through innovative formats in which all interviews and debates are solutions-focused. Imagine, and this is happening there, diametrically opposed politicians and stakeholders coming onto a debate program. They are there because they have agreed to a constructive format, focused on moving an issue forward. At the end of the discussion, they must have agreed on several concrete actions towards a solution, with shared accountability for delivery. And there is strong audience input and feedback throughout. Can you imagine any political debate where those are the rules, and that's how it plays out? Where solutions are the goal rather than taking down the opponent at all costs. As one of the news leaders responsible for rolling out this format observed, it has revitalised engagement with the public, and it is a far more rewarding experience for politicians, subject matter experts and those impacted by a particular issue because conflict has been replaced with a focus on outcomes. And - this is key - the interviewees return, months or weeks later, to update the public on their, collective, progress. Accountability in action. What's in it for news organisations? Audiences. According to the Constructive Institute, constructive journalism has led to increased news engagement, according to former Danish news executive and founder of the Constructive Institute, Ulrik Haagrup, interviewed in 2020 by DW News. While Scandinavia is leading the way, Australia is hot on its heels. Every day, across our local platforms, mastheads, news feeds, programs and services there are powerful examples of constructive reporting, with many innovative journalists and news leaders recognising that readers, viewers and listeners are hungry for a new approach to news. At Monash, we have joined with our colleagues in Denmark to expand the work of the Constructive Institute by elevating and learning from the inspiring work already under way here; and through fellowships and partnerships to further explore constructive journalism initiatives in Australia, Asia and the Pacific; and importantly to measure the impact such an editorial shift can have on audiences and on the bottom line for media organisations. Cleverly, the University of Canberra Digital Media Survey asked participants how trust in news could be improved. What they found in many ways reflects what the Constructive Institute is aiming to do to engage and trust in the media there must be more: facts and accuracy (26 per cent), less bias and opinion (24 per cent), more breadth and depth in reporting (17 per cent), greater transparency and accountability (15 per cent), increased verification (9 per cent), and more independence from commercial and political interests (9 per cent). Increased news avoidance is not inevitable. And, frankly, it is dangerous. In times of conflict, we must be informed, and the move towards more constructive journalism can help achieve that.
