Newspaper proprietors can no longer afford the 'bloated' newsrooms needed to do thoughtful reporting. Is the 'celebrity gossip' of Driscollmania a glimpse into the future of Southern Cross?

The crisis swamping the newspaper industry worldwide almost claimed its highest profile victim this week with the Boston Globe perilously close to collapse.

The US Senate is even looking at tax concessions to help save the industry.

Crikey is in mourning for one of the world's most respected mastheads, certain that quality journalism in Australia is now as good as dead.

Will sleazy tabloid reporting win the day?

Certainly, newspaper proprietors can no longer afford the so-called 'bloated' newsrooms it takes to do the thoughtful investigative reporting that will interest its core readership. This is why broadsheet newspapers are in a spiral of decline as readers fall away with each drop in quality.

Is this a glimpse into the future of Southern Cross?

Dilemma of Southern Cross poll

In response to those who asked about the purpose of this week's Southern Cross poll I wanted to glean how the 'insiders' who largely frequent Sydneyanglicans.net perceive the role of Southern Cross.

What we discovered is what I expected - the largest group of you (17%) think that Southern Cross' core business should be reporting news from Sydney Anglican parishes.

My dilemma is that making this sort of reporting actually useful to mission is highly labour intensive. My masters expect more than the 'parish pump' of jumping castles, cake stalls and parish anniversaries.

It’s important to note that this poll does not tell us (or Synod!) what you actually read, find interesting or helpful. Or even, dare I say, enjoy.

Driscollmania and commercial reality

I'm doubtful that the financial crisis will see the Southern Cross masthead disappear completely. But there will be an inevitable paradigm shift because we will be forced to accommodate the requirements of advertisers.

Assuming Anglican Media takes a 50 percent funding cut, advertising revenue will go from about 45 percent of Anglican Media's total budget to about 85 percent.

And what do advertisers essentially want?

Eyeballs.

There is validity in the idea that Southern Cross should become a genuine 'community' newspaper similar to the grassroots rural press (ie where everyone can expect to read about a friend, family member or neighbour). It's certainly true that people like reading about people they know.

Building this insight into a ratings-winning formula has practical problems for Southern Cross. In a Diocese with 800 congregations it is unlikely most Sydney Anglicans will see pictures of people they know too frequently in our pages.

What most readers will really care about is news that impacts their spiritual lives, their ministry and their parish.

This is one reason why Michael Kellahan's blog Driscoll has wrong strategy has smashed all readership records on this site this week. We are all sweating on the impact of Mars Hill Global on our patch.

There is another factor at play here. Driscollmania is the Sydney Anglican version of 'celebrity gossip' reporting.

Why do readers prefer to read about Driscoll than, for example, the future of Moore College, despite the fact that the College's revival is far more crucial to the life of our Diocese than the church planting decisions of another denomination?

Why?

My gut feel is that viewing Sydney Anglican leaders debate Driscoll's plans is entertaining: in the same way it's fun to watch a celebrity cage fight.

Depressing. Isn't it?

But turning this observation into a positive: you can help me greatly by commenting here on what you actually enjoy reading - both in the Christian and secular press.

How might that mesh with the purpose of Southern Cross to build a 'unified community of churches around the Diocesan mission'?