When I started as a young and (consequently) enthusiastic journalist at a B2B publication, it bugged me to no end that B2B journalism was treated as the poor country cousin of the mainstream journalism. Indeed I myself thought so and wanted to work for a publication which my dad would read at home.
“This is not real journalism (sigh),” would be my constant refrain.
Nobody can dispute that the mainstream or B2C publications have wider reach and consequently wider acceptance. Any student of journalism would dream of working in a mainstream journalism and not so much in a B2B publication. More often that not, a B2B journalist is more a product of circumstances and not so much of choice(there might be exceptions). The thrill of getting your article published in a national publication with a circulation of few lakhs is unbeaten by seeing the same article in a trade publication.
At the same time, the relevance of B2B journalism cannot be ignored. It serves the needs of the industry in a way B2C publications just cannot. It is not without reason that they are called `bible of the industry’. They are a one point contact for the news for the industry. Thus, in most of the cases, a B2B publication is almost a part of the industry—cheering when the industry does well and admonishing when they don’t.
In fact, the relevance of B2B journalism has increased over the years as journalism is no longer just about delivering news but also about forming communities and engaging your reader. B2B has a clear and an obvious advantage here.
However, B2B will thrive only when it is able to meet the need of credible information of the industry. This is challenging in today’s environment where every Tom, Dick and Harry has a blog. How is B2B journalism likely to evolve in the time to come is a topic of separate blog.
It is sad that there is a strong bias against B2B journalism...hope people would be able to see the relevance of both forms of journalism and not judge one at the cost of the other.
3 comments:
This question has just reminded me of an incident when I was discussing whether it's test cricket or one day(now we have 20:20 as well), which matters to a cricketer with my friend. Jokes apart, I don't think that people are biased against B2B publications in general. It's just that it caters to different genre of readers. It's actually in a sense is more satisfying and rewarding in a longer run. When you build a community, you got a responsibility to engage and nurture them. And the kind of respect you get from those guys is unmatchable from B2C journalism, where you get recognition only till you are with a reputed brand.
Yes, if you are really keen to do real journalism (which is anyways not possible nowdays as most of the newspapers are running on ad share model), you might would want to work for magazine like tehalka. But having said that, I guess in a longer run what matters is your hardwork and focus. Recognition does not wait for any such term like B2B or B2C.
Nice to read.
Well said Jatin. It took me some time to realise this but it is true...the kind of hobnobbing which exists between a B2B journalist will turn any B2C journalist green with envy. And don't we know that all B2C guys go thru B2B publications for story ideas.
The definition of real journalism is changing and is also extremely subjective. What is real to you might not be real to me...the debate goes on?
Post a Comment