At the coalface

In conducting my research for my journalism feature, I came across coalface magazine. My feature will be on the coverage of mining in Australian media, something of a hot topic in recent years.

While interviewing John Krey, vice-president of the Bulga-Milbrodale Progress Association about mining, he made mention of Coalface, an independent magazine dedicated to promoting the benefits of mining to the public.

Or as he put it, a "piece of complete propaganda."

Now we have to take a step back from the issue here. Obviously Krey, being in his position, might have his opinions coloured by recent events. Certainly his village has been embroiled in several battles with mining giant Rio Tinto in recent times. Well, more than several.

But it is an interesting premise. Coalface, which can be found here, is advertised as an independent magazine in the Hunter to highlight the real faces of mining in the Hunter Valley. It says so right here on the NSW Mineral's Council website.... 

While I have not particularly taken one stand over another in the 'propaganda' claim, I do think the issue of this magazine raises a few interesting points. Here we have a publication that openly communicates it is pro-mining and has an agenda of promoting the industry.

Can we call this magazine journalism? Or is it really just well-dressed PR? It makes me think of Johnsen's diagram from Journalism Research and Investigation in a Digital World (2013)

 This magazine is almost entirely accommodation. Spelled incorrectly in my slide. How embarrassing.But if there is no accommodation to journalistic questions, does it become PR? Despite it being an independent magazine, operating outside the industry, can we really call it journalism?