Guest blogger Richard Partington argues how a lack of diversity in the media threatens the integrity of the industry.
A central tenet of journalism is that it ought to speak in the public interest.
Yet, after work experience at several national newspapers, I've come to see the industry as a monoculture in danger of being unable to understand the diversity of the nation and speak on its behalf.
During my Easter break from university, I went to three national newspapers to do work experience, where I found the lack of diversity in the news room to be abundantly evident.
There was a dearth of regional accents and tones of skin in each office and, apart from a few exceptions to the rule, the demographic norm was white, middle class, home counties, liberal and affluent.
You could explain this geographically. All of the national newspapers are based in London (which can be a barrier to diversity in itself), so it follows that the majority of employees will live in the surrounding area in order to get to work.
Yet even then you won't hear many cockney voices or estuary accents, or see more than one or two shades of skin that make up London's racial technicolour.
The trade of journalism has become notoriously hard to crack, particularly so if you come from outside of the home counties, have no connections in the industry and only a small amount of money.
Declining advertising revenues brought on by the recession and the migration of consumers online has left the industry in turmoil. Jobs have been cut and new openings are scarce.
The story is true at a regional level, too, and it is reportedly becoming harder for regional journalists to make the transition to the national press.
The result is that budding hacks have to be exceptionally well qualified, connected and experienced to beat hundreds of rivals to the job.
Aside from nepotism, which - sadly - can rear its ugly head in the media and many other industries, one of the main routes to securing a job on a national paper is unpaid work experience.
The problem here is the expenditure of living in the capital for weeks, and even months, upon end without any pay. Only those with the time and money to do work for free can afford to take the risk.
As a result, the majority of 'workies', as they are often known, who can afford to stick it out are those from affluent backgrounds with parents who can fund the experience. Many live at home, or with relatives in the capital.
Everyone else either has to miss out on the opportunity or risk bankruptcy in the process.
The danger now is that journalism risks becoming even more monocultural than ever before.
In ten or 15 years time, the industry could be saturated by upper middle-class journalists. Although they might be fantastic writers, able and equipped to do the job, they may not be able to fully understand the cultural make up of the public they are supposed to represent.
Some national news organisations offer funded ethnic diversity placements or employment schemes, though not nearly enough is being done. There are no such schemes for regional-based aspiring journalists who can't afford to move to London.
It is important that our national media institutions have journalists from all walks of life, in order that the anger of the average citizen towards the abuse of political or commercial power is accurately and vocally expressed.
Representative journalism is in danger and action needs to be taken. The alternative could be that we see the trade slip from its position as the fourth estate of the realm - acting as a check on those in power - to being the realm of the estate-owning gentry.
Richard Partington, 22, is an MA Journalism student at City University, London. He is originally from Warrington, near Manchester, and blogs at www.richardpartington.co.uk.
A central tenet of journalism is that it ought to speak in the public interest.
Yet, after work experience at several national newspapers, I've come to see the industry as a monoculture in danger of being unable to understand the diversity of the nation and speak on its behalf.
During my Easter break from university, I went to three national newspapers to do work experience, where I found the lack of diversity in the news room to be abundantly evident.
There was a dearth of regional accents and tones of skin in each office and, apart from a few exceptions to the rule, the demographic norm was white, middle class, home counties, liberal and affluent.
You could explain this geographically. All of the national newspapers are based in London (which can be a barrier to diversity in itself), so it follows that the majority of employees will live in the surrounding area in order to get to work.
Yet even then you won't hear many cockney voices or estuary accents, or see more than one or two shades of skin that make up London's racial technicolour.
The trade of journalism has become notoriously hard to crack, particularly so if you come from outside of the home counties, have no connections in the industry and only a small amount of money.
Declining advertising revenues brought on by the recession and the migration of consumers online has left the industry in turmoil. Jobs have been cut and new openings are scarce.
The story is true at a regional level, too, and it is reportedly becoming harder for regional journalists to make the transition to the national press.
The result is that budding hacks have to be exceptionally well qualified, connected and experienced to beat hundreds of rivals to the job.
Aside from nepotism, which - sadly - can rear its ugly head in the media and many other industries, one of the main routes to securing a job on a national paper is unpaid work experience.
The problem here is the expenditure of living in the capital for weeks, and even months, upon end without any pay. Only those with the time and money to do work for free can afford to take the risk.
As a result, the majority of 'workies', as they are often known, who can afford to stick it out are those from affluent backgrounds with parents who can fund the experience. Many live at home, or with relatives in the capital.
Everyone else either has to miss out on the opportunity or risk bankruptcy in the process.
The danger now is that journalism risks becoming even more monocultural than ever before.
In ten or 15 years time, the industry could be saturated by upper middle-class journalists. Although they might be fantastic writers, able and equipped to do the job, they may not be able to fully understand the cultural make up of the public they are supposed to represent.
Some national news organisations offer funded ethnic diversity placements or employment schemes, though not nearly enough is being done. There are no such schemes for regional-based aspiring journalists who can't afford to move to London.
It is important that our national media institutions have journalists from all walks of life, in order that the anger of the average citizen towards the abuse of political or commercial power is accurately and vocally expressed.
Representative journalism is in danger and action needs to be taken. The alternative could be that we see the trade slip from its position as the fourth estate of the realm - acting as a check on those in power - to being the realm of the estate-owning gentry.
Richard Partington, 22, is an MA Journalism student at City University, London. He is originally from Warrington, near Manchester, and blogs at www.richardpartington.co.uk.
