By Charly SHELTON

It’s been 10 years since we founded this paper. A lot has changed in those 10 years. For one, we started the paper on a dining room table with four people – Robin Goldsworthy, editor, Mary O’Keefe, news reporter, Luci Corona, layout designer, and me, entertainment reporter, photographer, videographer, tech wizard, webmaster and whatever else needed to be done. We all traded off stuff to do – Robin would write stories, Mary took videos, I proofread articles. That’s how we still do it; it’s one thing that hasn’t changed. But now we’re in an office and some, including myself, work off-site, with a pool of contributors in the dozens over the years.

I’ve seen a shift in the entertainment industry as well. Marvel changed movies, The Wizarding World of Harry Potter changed theme parks, Apple changed tech back in 2007 with the iPhone – a trend that continues today. But the one biggest thing I’ve seen change in the world as it relates to the industry is the rise of the influencer.

Prior to opening CV Weekly, Mary, Robin and I were all reporters together at a paper owned by the LA Times. I’ve always been the entertainment guy, even then. Granted – saying you’re with a paper owned by the Times opened a lot of doors once. Those same doors, and more, were open to CV Weekly when I said I was with an independently owned newspaper even outside of LA. That meant something.

To find a “real paper” like that today is rare, to see one survive even more so. Even in entertainment reporting, that is important. When I review something and it’s good, it’s not because we are being paid for the review or because the parent company also owns a share in the paper. It’s because I like it. Journalistic integrity is important for anyone who reports on anything.

But despite beating those odds and being a good paper that avoided the foibles of the large papers, the swinging of the pendulum brought a new set of problems. Now there are many independent news “reporters” and outlets, and they are judged based on their clicks and their followers. If the number of followers isn’t sky high, an invitation to a press event isn’t forthcoming. But the number of followers, online clicks, views – all of that – results from being bigger and louder than everyone else. This behavior doesn’t lend itself to fair and balanced journalism but it does lend itself to the sensationalist outlets and click bait farms that traffic in top 10 lists and “number three will shock you.”

The same goes for entertainment. These Internet influencers who have built a career (and an income) on showing how cool their life is are getting more clicks than a balanced review. I know several influencers and see them at these events, and sometimes we report on the exact same event though with two totally different stories. On my end, I try to show what’s happening and how the reader can join in on the fun while commenting on whether event is worth experiencing. Influencers show how exclusive the event is and how hard it would be for the public to get in, and that’s why you have to subscribe to their channel because they have the best.

Also there’s no regulation on influencers or Internet reporting. Nothing has to be fact-checked, nothing will happen to those who say whatever they want. There’s no culpability.

This is by no means true for every influencer. There are good ones and bad ones, just like there are good and bad news stations, newspapers and news sites. But in my opinion from what I’ve seen over the years the heartbeat of the influencer industry revolves around these bad practices because that’s what works. And while the best influencers always fact-check and do a good job at reporting, the best ones are not always the most popular ones or the most lucrative. I hate seeing my colleagues, good reporters and influencers who do the work and put out good stories, get cut from a press list because the number of their followers isn’t as high as the food blogger who wants to review this movie or theme park attraction.

So what does this mean? What have I learned in the last 10 years? I’ve learned to always get news from a source you trust, one that is fair and balanced and is inclusive, bringing the reader into the story. National Geographic is great at driving home a point as though the reader were standing next to the reporter. I want every story to feel like that: what is happening, why it’s important and how you can get involved. No sensationalist additives to force a click. And I feel that CV Weekly does this well and we strive toward that goal continuously every day. I am proud to be part of this paper.

Even if I’m cut from a press list.

  Charly Shelton