The main tutor at university today confirmed what Simone had mentioned in the forum: yes, there is the desire to put as many journalists in the market as possible. Just put them there, however good, however bad, the point is, there must be many.
It all started as a friendly conversation, what do you think of this course, what was good, what would you improve… another girl complained about the fact that, on “third” year, people do not know simple punctuation usage like colon or semicolons. He had been taking notes, in order to (I assumed) to pass them on to the competent departments or meetings. At the moment of this complain, he just put the pen down. Then I suggested having some kind of entry test, like the ones some of my friends, and myself, had to undertake to go to other certain universities. I remember having to write a proper article on privacy before even getting the "privilege" of being interviewed at the London College of Printing. I’ve said he had put the pen down. But then he prepared to argue his case.
“So, what makes you think that you would have been accepted?” or, “why do you not want people to go to university?” but that is not the point! The point is, first they are admitted to a course that is well beyond some people’s capabilities (I have not got the figures but I have seen too many people drop because they simply couldn’t cope) and second, even if they pass after the years, they go out without knowing how to write… “well Ana, that is what sub-editors are for”.
And then he went about the need for this society to have more graduates than the 16% that were in the 1960s. There should be 40%, apparently. Freelances maintain that there is not enough work for all of them, but my tutor knows better.
So for me, this confirms the theory to which I got from Simone’s comment, that the system throws more and more journalists into the market not only in order to drop wages and salaries (the old law of offer and demand) but also to keep them more in control. That is another economic theory by the way: an intelligent way of managing your business and capital is by being in control. And you are more in control of your work force if there is a legion of unemployed behind your staff, willing to take on their jobs should your employees step out of the rules you establish.
That the reason why factories are built in areas with hight unemployment. It is not an altruistic desire to reduce unemployment figures; the reason is that in those areas is where the workers are most controllable.
