National Geographic Loses Credibility in Travel Community
After hearing the news that Rupert Murdoch now has a 73% stake in National Geographic from a fellow travel blogger, there was an overwhelming sense of dismay. Only two years ago, I was celebrating 125 years of National Geographic at an exhibition in Taiwan, and now I’m unfollowing their social media accounts.
National Geographic’s own ethos is to “inspire people to care about the planet.” It’s one of the most – if not the most – trusted and respected resources for scientific and environmental journalism globally.
Now, in what seems to be an incredibly awful juxtaposition of values, the magazine is controlled by self-confessed climate change sceptic Rupert Murdoch.
As part of the deal with Murdoch’s 21st Century Fox who are infamous for misleading coverage of climate change issues, National Geographic has also sacrificed it’s non-profit status after 127 years. The brand has now become a for-profit organisation with assets including the magazines, television channels and related digital and social media platforms coming under the new control.
A statement was released by National Geographic Society President, Gary Knell, saying: “The expansion of our nearly two decade partnership with 21st Century Fox is another milestone for The National Geographic Society … The value generated by this transaction, including the consistent and attractive revenue stream that National Geographic Partners will deliver, ensures that we will have greater resources for this work, which includes our grant making programs that support scientists and explorers around the world.”
Unfortunately, profits seem to have won over credibility and ethics, but this news hasn’t gone unnoticed by readers. Many readers are choosing to put down their magazines and unfollow National Geographic’s social media accounts because of the questionable motives and influence that will no doubt result from the change of ownership.
The news caused a flood of National Geographic readers, followers and fellow travel bloggers to express their dismay, devastation and even outrage across Twitter and other social media sites.
Sponsored by Shell and owned by Murdoch! #NationalGeographic is now the greatest threat to the environment! UNFOLLOW @NatGeo #unfollownatgeo
— Shing @TheCultureMap (@TheCultureMap) September 10, 2015
#NatGeo selling its non-profit status to #FoxNews @rupertmurdoch – such a shot to the heart to all the people who grew up on it & trust it — Kara Killeen (@karakilleen) September 14, 2015
That sound you hear? 100k hearts breaking. @NatGeo sold to Murdoch after 127yrs of nonprofit science journalism #WHY https://t.co/YpCWfLpdOV
— Shannon Wianecki (@swianecki) September 9, 2015
You’d think @natgeo wouldn’t sell their soul to @rupertmurdoch http://t.co/7DbD17gZQV #nationalgeographic #climate — Steve Rhodes (@tigerbeat) September 9, 2015
Time to #unfollownatgeo | A sad day @nationalgeographic #nationalgeographic — Charlie on Travel (@CharlieOnTravel) September 10, 2015
Fortunately, the internet and social media has given a voice to everyone who wants to express their opinion. The reactions of readers and followers has shown that people do care about the ethics and morals behind what they’re reading.
Like many others, I’m saddened that I’ll no longer be able to trust the credibility of environmental journalism on National Geographic, to scroll in awe through their Instagram photos or use them as a source for my own travel blogs.
Thankfully though, there are many other credible writers, photographers, travel bloggers, magazines, publications and organisations out there who are spreading the word about responsible travel, protecting the environment and who care about making positive changes still out there.
What’s your opinion on the new ownership of National Geographic? How do you think it will affect the publication?
Header Image | kazuend
Debbie
This is from a friend of mine who works for National Geographic.
I’ve seen so many sentiments along these lines,[photo of a gravestone] and I can imagine my own reaction being similar if I weren’t so close to the story. As an employee of NGS, I ask that everyone withhold judgment, as we are hoping and planning to use this windfall to increase our ability to explore, learn, and share. If Fox ends up exerting clear editorial influence, then I’ll join the chorus writing eulogies. Until then, I remain proud of who we are and what we do.
I guess I will take a “wait-and-see” approach.
Charlie on Travel
Hey Debbie – I’m sure that everyone who works for Nat Geo is holding their breath! I can’t imagine what a horrible situation it is for them. Unfortunately I can’t see a scenario in which editorial freedom that opposes the core sentiments and beliefs of the majority stakeholder being a reality. I think there were probably many other options and alternatives that Nat Geo could have considered rather than selling out to Murdoch whose control of the media is already uncomfortably extensive. There are also other concerns, such as the fact that some of Nat Geo’s content is sponsored by Shell for example, which I hadn’t read about until now, and that in itself to me is unacceptable as well.
Sharon
I’m with you on this Charlie. Once an organisation crosses that line of a not for profit status, their moral and ethical stance becomes somewhat blurred.
With Rupert Murdoch now having a 73% stake in National Geographic, I think that it is naive of anyone to think that their moral compass will not change direction, especially when they are personally reaping the rewards!
Hope is all that we ever have when things change.
The positive from this, is that there are others worth reading and following, and perhaps it’s their time to shine.
Charlie on Travel
Yes, I also think that it would be naive to think that his influence won’t affect the editorial decisions and content of Nat Geo. I’ve seen a couple of sentiments around the internet, including in the comments here, hoping that the editorial team will still have freedom to produce content as it has been – but I’m hugely sceptical of this. In fact, I don’t believe it’s possible.
Katie Featherstone
I kind of wish I’d never found out about this. :(
Charlie on Travel
An understandable reaction, I think! I almost feel the same… but also I 100% want to know the source of what I’m reading all the time…
Ted
This is BAD news. NG was one of the most trusted publications in the world. Now we’ll get all the stupidity of profiteering. Suppose the photographers will start using Kodak now, instead of Hassellblad for their cameras.
Charlie on Travel
It’s bad news indeed..
Amélie
Wow Charlie, I’m learning about this from you. Loosing faith in humanity slowly. Thank you for the always accurate and insightful information and content you provide. Your blog has been a great source of inspiration for me this past year.
Charlie on Travel
Hi Amelie, tell me about it… Actually, I don’t think that this issue got anywhere near enough coverage in the press. I speculate but, it sneakily coincided with the news about the end of the Labour votes and Jeremy Corbyn being appointed and may have been overshadowed by the hubbub around that. that, or no one really cares about Rupert Murdoch and Fox’s reach extending even further!?
That’s really sweet of you to say and I’m glad that my blog posts have been worth reading for you! I really appreciate it :)
Shing
I’m still really troubled by this Charlie. It’s a bit embarrassing to admit but I started crying when I found out the news, I couldn’t help it. In a world where pollution is rife and climate change is being perpetually downplayed by politicians and media moguls like Murdoch we looked at institutes like National Geographic as a beacon of hope.
It’s been a few weeks now and you’re the only travel blogger I’ve seen write something on their blog about it. There are other travel bloggers who use responsible travel as part of their ethos (or maybe I should say ‘branding’?) and I still see them tagging National Geographic when they upload a new post to Twitter or Instagram. These kind of double-standards don’t sit well with me at all.
Charlie on Travel
I don’t think that’s anything to be embarrassed about. I was really shocked that more people didn’t react in the same way that you and I did. I felt that people actually weren’t as upset by it, but I’m not sure why that is. Like you say, I’ve also not seen that many travel bloggers covering it on their blogs or being outraged (even if in a low key way) on their social media profiles.
Perhaps people just don’t fully realise how this would impact National Geographic’s credibility, or perhaps there are a lot of people who are optimistic that it won’t change their core ethos (which I believe it definitely will). I’m certainly not planning on ever quoting or using Nat Geo as a source in my writing with the current ownership change though.
Michael Huxley
I hear what you are both saying (I do) but my personal anger and dismay at this hasn’t been covered on my own site because it simply doesn’t fit in with my target audience or niche, and I have to be very strict on that. My site is a business, not a personal forum. I suppose many others are the same, That isn’t to say every site is like that of course, just explaining why I personally didn’t write about it.
Charlie on Travel
Hey Mike, thanks for adding to our discussion. Yes, definitely bloggers have to be careful about what content they feel it is relevant to post on their websites, and certainly I don’t think that just every blogger should be including a discussion of it. Nonetheless, I’ve not seen many blogs at all, even where it could be relevant, touching on the issue.
Bobbi Gould
I had not heard this! How disappointing:/ It’s a sad state of affairs to lose such a trusted source! I wonder if there is anything we can do about it beyond complain.
Charlie on Travel
Hey Bobbi – yes, actually the news didn’t blow up as much as I felt it should have and it came across as quite hush-hush. I myself heard about it from another travel blogger (Shing from The Culture Map) and because of that decided it was important to write on the topic.
Jason
What a big overreaction I’ve worked with nat Geo before I was a blogger and they are some of the most highly respected people out there ,the people you quoted in your Twitter tweets about unfollowing at Geo they don’t represent a large degree of their audience and will not make a difference if they lose their support a few bloggers is not going to change net Geo’s profit margin . The fact that you will unfollow Nat Geo and not use their pictures just because their own by media magnet shows how little thought you put into your article . It’s not like when the greatest scientific research organizations is just going to bend over and falsify all of their information . But then again you can unfollow them you and your hundred viewers . I doubt not Geo will notice or even care . Good clickbait though, I fell for it .
Charlie on Travel
Hey Jason, good to hear your thoughts. You think that there was an overreaction to the acquisition of Nat Geo by myself and other people who were previously fans/readers/followers? Please don’t misunderstand me, I’m not saying that the bloggers, journalists and other freelancers who work for Nat Geo aren’t some of the most highly respectable, credible and incredibly talent people out there – I don’t think that anyone is saying that, because we all know that many of them are certainly at the top of their fields and the millions of people who did/do follow Nat Geo wouldn’t do so if it wasn’t for their amazing content.
The argument here isn’t about “changing Nat Geo’s profit margin.” Myself and other travel bloggers aren’t withdrawing from reading and following Nat Geo because we’re aiming to make them lose profits. We’re doing it because we feel that the influence that Murdoch now holds means that the content produced by Nat Geo can never be free of that influence and the publication does not hold the same credibility now that the person in charge has changed. The magazine is now a for-profit and the direction it takes is not in the hands of the contributors and freelancers that they employ – their work can be used and manipulated in whatever way Nat Geo as a company see fit.
I might add that I would never be using Nat Geo’s pictures because it is illegal to steal and use photos in this way without the correct creative commons licence. No one should be using pictures from Nat Geo’s website at all because they are not free for use.
On this point: “It’s not like when the greatest scientific research organizations is just going to bend over and falsify all of their information.” What is it that makes you think that won’t happen?
This is certainly not a click-bait article and my blog isn’t subject to high enough traffic for it ever to be considered as a publication that attracts readers through clickbait headlines and hashed together content. This is a personal opinion and discussion based piece.
Nikita
When I was young, I dreamed of writing for National Geographic. That dream just died. Absolutely heart-breaking. At least we have the freedom to encourage publications who actually do care for the environment, and preserving the beautiful planet National Geographic makes so much money showcasing!
Charlie on Travel
Hi Nikita – I think that many travel writers and travel bloggers can relate to this. Nat Geo was certainly put on a pedestal by many of us, and I think it just goes to show how dangerous it can be when one publication has the monopoly like how Nat Geo does.
Joanna Kalafatis
A little late here, but just came across your article and kudos to you for expressing what so many of us felt upon hearing the news. Like you said, I find it hard to believe this new ownership won’t influence the direction of the content, if only because when you look at Murdoch’s other holdings, most prominently FOX News, it is clear that exaggerations, misrepresentations, and outright lies created to fit a certain narrative (i.e. Murdoch’s) win out over any actual, ethical journalism. FOX viewers are consistently among the most misinformed.
So why would he adopt a different approach for National Geographic? It’s clear Murdoch buys out media for one reason, and one reason only: to further his agenda.
Charlie on Travel
Hi Joanna, thanks for sharing your thoughts on this. I think that we’re very much on the same page about how this change will compromise the ethics of the publication and the Nat Geo enterprise altogether, especially in light of how FOX News portrays itself and news stories.
Michael Huxley
I totally agree with you and genuinely am absolutely gutted over this move. NG used to be THE pinnacle, the holy grail for writers everywhere, from travel and adventure through science and academia it didn’t matter, it was unassailable and as writers each one of us would have given a limb to work alongside or for it.
Now it IS dead. And I’m sorry for all those who work for it, but you cannot maintain such a valued reputation when it has been soiled so badly. You may have good intentions left in you, but nothing NG ever says or does from now on will be able to get that stench of Murdoch off it. Your word, your reputation will never again be as trusted or as valuable as it once was because of what you associate with.
As a professional travel blogger I once would have done anything to have the NG badge on my ‘worked with or seen on’ section on my site. Now they can get in line and pay me like every other business/brand.
Charlie on Travel
Yes, I agree entirely with what you’re saying. Unfortunately, the world is changing and we can’t expect things to stay the same forever, but it is definitely a sad moment for every writer within the travel community – and especially for those who write for Nat Geo I should think. I have very similar sentiments about it now.
Leah
I was sickened by the news of this acquisition and have since found myself unfollowing Nat Geo’s social media. It wasn’t a knee-jerk reaction–instead, I waited until some completely and utterly inane bullshit was produced and labeled as “news” before I totally lost my shit. As others have already mentioned, though, the trust was gone from the moment I found out; I was sort of curious to see how badly they’d go down in flames.
Charlie on Travel
To be honest, I’ve not looked at Nat Geo’s social channels since the news (I was one of the ones who unfollowed straight away) so I don’t know how much they’ve changed. I think that even if they hadn’t changed at all though, for me it would still seem wrong to follow a publication whose content is so heavily influenced and sponsored. I don’t know that you could ever trust that kind of content.
Karissa Ketelhut
I officially unfollowed National Geographic today. I knew that a soon as Fox got hold of the name they would destroy it. But I waited to see and became increasingly disgusted. All the click bait, all the biased articals…… it was like reading BUZZFEED!! They have lost their credibility and if I were a teacher I wouldn’t let my students use them. And I hope schools abandon them too. They are no longer what their mission statement claims. If I wanted to read emotionally charged biased articals I’d read the PETA website…..