The Free Press

Who's going to pay for it?

If you haven’t seen Scott Pelley’s interview on his firing from “60 Minutes,” it’s a master class on the passions and principles that drive a professional journalist:

It’s easy to dismiss broadcast presenters as well-paid narcissists. His emotions are raw - and some of the language is over the top. Despite what he says, Bari Weiss didn’t kill anybody.

But - and anyone who has managed creative people will tell you this - this passion is what fuels greatness. And he has had a lifetime of reporting stories from difficult places at some personal cost.

It’s the end of the line for “60 Minutes” as we know it. He brags that “Last season, we had 2.5 billion views. That’s a third of humanity! So we’re riding high.”

Of course, it wasn’t ⅓ of humanity. Goalhanger, a media startup from the UK that does serious content as well, had 1.8 billion views last year - and likely deeper engagement with a younger audience

.

Mr. Beast has over 128 billion views.

“60 Minutes” has done well in its transition to digital, but the days when it was a top 10 TV show (and what that meant) have largely ended.

Scott Pelley made - as far as I can tell - about $7 million last year. He will likely make many millions more in book deals and speaking engagements.

This is not to dismiss the importance of what’s happening in journalism or at “60 Minutes.” Institutions once degraded or destroyed are hard to replace - but the question is, who will support them?

Broadcast television and a sense of public service supported a few gems like “60 Minutes” for a long time. Investigative journalism is expensive.

How will our fragmented age do the same? It’s interesting that Pelley spoke, in what looks like TV to me, on the New York Times’ YouTube channel.

It’s really hard to monetize YouTube in the way CBS monetized “60 Minutes” - 2.5 billion views, at the low end, are only worth about 2.5 million bucks. That’s about 4 months of Pelley’s time.

But if you’re a passionate, public-minded creator, even a fraction of that impact is gold for you, your work, and your role in the culture. And, if you’re a Goalhanger, a digital-first company, it’s a sustainable business. Last week, they were named the UK’s fastest-growing company through a combination of subscriptions, licensing, live events, and ad sales. That’s still only a $50 million-a-year business (7 Scott Pelleys, maybe a million for catering, car service and an assistant or two).

That doesn’t replace the hard work of chasing down stories and holding the powerful to account. Beyond the budget of a show like “60 Minutes,” it was the backing of a multi-billion-dollar corporate parent that gave the journalists confidence that their backs were covered.

Personally, I’m doubling down on supporting digital startups and institutions that support journalism. As a Canadian, I’m always slightly embarrassed that the New York Times has more subscribers here than the Globe and Mail. You don’t know what you’ve got til it’s gone.

As Miranda Priestley says in a cutting remark to a would-be usurper in “The Devil Wears Prada 2”: “I’m sorry. You’re not a visionary, you’re a vendor.”

Our journalistic institutions need more visionaries at the moment.