Skyful of Lies and Black Swans: The New Tyranny of Shifting Information Power in Crises. Nik Gowing. Oxford, UK: Reuters Institute for the Study of Journalism, 2009. 84 pp. £13 pbk. Free download from http:// reutersinstitute.politics.ox.ac.uk/ publications/risj.html.
Nik Gowing’s career as a media professional, pundit, and scholar gives his insights into how news works considerable credibility. In this 2009 paper for the Reuters Institute for the Study of Journalism, the longtime BBC commentator wonders and wanders through new media’s impact on public policy, and ponders “the new fragility and brittleness” of social institutions. Are government, military, and corporate bosses powerless or ineffectual when what Gowing calls “fast proliferating and almost ubiquitous breed of ‘information doers’” can set and frame the debate before the institutions of power can in gear?
Perhaps, but Gowing himself falls victim to this phenomenon. The veteran newsman’s insights suffer in this case from the inability of traditional publishing to get him into print before the “um, duh” response to his analysis kicks in. As he worries about the impact of new technologies and real-time commentary, the “information doers” have already, well, done it. The value of Gowing’s thoughts developed over his impressive news career resides not in his perspectives, but in noting how “the new tyranny of shifting information power” got there before him.
“Black Swan Theory” refers to unexpected events that change the world before the powers that be can react to head off media reports that may be “skyfuls of lies.” Gowing worries that such events and, perhaps more important, the new realities of instant communication, make message management by governments, social and corporate leaders — and traditional media — impotent.
“Empowered by current, cheap, lightweight, ‘go anywhere’ technologies, [’information doers’] have an unprecedented mass ability to bear witness,” Gowing writes. “The result is a matrix of real-time information flows that challenges the inadequacy of the structures of power to respond with effective impact and in a timely way.”
As any old-time journalist knows, being first and being right are crucial to the social role of the press as an influential thought-leader and player in the larger society. In this case, Gowing is right, but not first. In this essay, Gowing concludes that news can turn our lives upside-down, and that traditional institutions—governmental, political, corporate, educational—are too far behind the gentle curving flight of swans, black or otherwise. “[T]he new real-time media realities are harsh,” Gowing observes. “But once understood the nature of the solutions is a ‘no-brainer.’”
Given that this is such a no-brainer, it is a wonder that so much effort was required to outline the nature of the proposed solutions. As a major U.S. TV network once proposed in an advertising campaign for summer reruns, if you haven’t seen it (or thought about it), it’s new to you.
Overlooking that, however, Gowing’s observations and recommendations make sense, and will be useful to the newcoming reader or student for whom these ideas are new. Being first and fastest and loudest clearly can make an enormous difference for policymakers. Setting the agenda, framing the story, and sculpting the reality have always been the goal of powerbrokers and newsmen, and as Gowing discusses, both the press and the politicians have lost control of the initiative. “Transparency” is now at least as important as first-place in the new nanosecond information environment: “The imperative is to enter the information space swiftly and report whatever is clear and known,” Gowing says, “however little that is.”
Gowing thinks “information doers”— meaning any Regular Joe with a cell phone — now outpace professional news media “with an inherent ability to pro-duce a ‘civilian surge’ of real-time information.” This means that “it is ‘harder to hide,’” Gowing says—hiding from whom is unclear. “Accept that the professional price for ignorance and naiveté about media will often be witheringly high.”
Gowing’s recommendation is to “embrace” and “engage” new civilian players in the media environment because media professionals and government policymakers won’t be able to control the message anyway. “[C]reate the impression and reality of a new level of assertive engagement” during times of crisis, Gowing urges, “however vulnerable the reality may seem behind the scenes.”
Nik Gowing knows what he’s talking about. The “main presenter” on BBC’s World News since 1996, Gowing has been a bureau chief for ITN in Warsaw and Rome, and a longtime diplomatic news editor. He has extensive experience to back up his recommendations for handling news flow during crises, and his observations about the impact of the “new tyranny of shifting information power” in the online/iPhone/uplink age make sense.
“Nik Gowing has a fine reputation as a media geometrician who is always ahead of the curve,” says a University of London professor in a book-jacket blurb. Says another, a former British ambassador to the United Nations, “Nik Gowing asks the questions none of us should duck, least of all political leaders,” about the impact of instant news.
For that reason, students (and civilians) would benefit from a reading of Gowing’s short, smart, and accessible book. It’s not rocket science, but understanding who creates the message, who frames the news — and why — and who may spread a “skyful of lies” across public debate all represents essential basic literacy for newspeople, news consumers, and policymakers amid all the noise from Facebook, Twitter, and instant messaging, in an age of declining public engagement.
EDWARD C. PEASE
Utah State University