October 24th, 2009 
joel 
Columbia Journalism Review
A new report from a professor from the Columbia School of Journalism and the former executive editor of the Washington Post calls for a federal loan program to support the generation of local news. The report, appearing in the Columbia Journalism Review, calls to question whether “independent news reporting is a public good whose diminution requires urgent attention.” To further quote The Reconstruction of American Journalism:
What is under threat is independent reporting that provides information, investigation, analysis, and community knowledge, particularly in the coverage of local affairs.
Howard Kurtz of the Washington Post provides some good analysis of the scholarly report, punctuated by many “green shoots” of entrepreneurship by professional journalists.
Considering the massive layoffs throughout the local media community, would easier access to credit benefit those journalists remaining to continue strong independent reporting?
Posted in 
Tags: 
Loading ...
“Independent Journalism” through federal funding????
A contradiction of Orwellian proportions.
What other industry has achieved “independence” through federal funding? Banking? Autos? Health care?
Sadly, in today’s America too many citizens will fail to understand the conflict of interest that exist when government funded “journalists” report on government actions.
How gauche! Another government bailout. The authors of this report propose to reward failing newspapers for mis-managing their business operations while at the same time forsaking their obligations to the First Amendment and turning newspapers into virtual television screens. Meanwhile the few successful newspapers would be conversely penalized for being successful because they wouldn’t need a bailout.
Say there’s a FOX-like newspaper somewhere. The vindictive triumvirate Obama/Dunn/Axelrod – and the Terrible Twosome – Reid and Pelosi – could pull its federal News Grant if they don’t like what it’s printing.
Joe,
“Say there’s a FOX-like newspaper somewhere. The vindictive triumvirate Obama/Dunn/Axelrod – and the Terrible Twosome – Reid and Pelosi – could pull its federal News Grant if they don’t like what it’s printing.”
See the Freedom of the Press…See the Freedom of the Press destroyed!
I don’t know how this happened, but I actually agree with you on this!
Thinking about this, there is a FOX-like paper. It is the Wall Street Journal, which now outsells USA Today. It is the number one paper in the country, just as FOX is the number one cable news outlet. On the other hand, the New York Times needs help. Lotsa help. I wonder why.
The reason that local news reporting would need any sort of government-bailout program is not due to anything other than local media owners not willing to put enough of their own money into the enterprise. It has nothing to do with a “takeover” of the media by the Federal gov’t., it is because the FCC’s (and the citizens’) refusal to make local media owners live up to the language in their licenses – to operate in the “Public Interest, Convenience, and Neccessity”. The local media owners agreed to this when they got their licenses – and, not only in Erie, but everywhere in the United States, they have not lived up to their part of the agreement.
When you or I get a drivers license from the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania, we agree to a certain set of terms. We will carry insurance on our vehicles. We will abide by the driving laws of the Commonwealth. We will have our vehicles inspected once a year, and, if our vehicles are in violation of the codes set up by the Commonwealth, will have our vehicles reapired to the point where they will pass said inspection. Local media owners entered into a similar agreement with the FCC. In return for the free use of the public’s airwaves, they agree to provide programming in the “PICN”. To me, and to anyone else who took AJ Miceli’s class at GU, that includes providing a robust local news operation. One that delves into issues directly affecting the local community – regardless of how that might affect local advertising, or the bottom line for a particular department at said TV station.
If local media owners cannot provide a vigorous, local news operation, they should not get a renewal of their license. It’s in the contract. The contract between the PEOPLE and the owners. If we the People aren’t served properly by the current owners, we need to stand up and void their contracts when they come up for renewal. (And, yes, as a veteran of over 25 years in local media, I do know how hard this will be, but, a contract is a contract!)
Couldn’t agree more, Mr. Bohlen. But how does one define something as subjective as “vigorous local news operation,” and who gets to define and enforce it? Only government can do that. Ergo, government control.
No, Joe, I think the local community is the body that gets to enforce that. If WE think that the local electronic media is not serving our purposes, then we are the ones who have to stand up and tell the FCC. The defintion was purposely left vague by the FCC so that the community can decide. If the FCC gets enough complaints, they are the ones who can affect change. We need to keep a sharp eye out on the service our local media is providing us. If we don’t feel we are being served, it is our duty to speak up. Then and only then will the FCC have enough evidence to possibly revoke a license to a local media owner.
But the FCC is subject to the political whims and control of the congress, which can change the laws governing the FCC willy nilly, and the president. Do you think for a moment they are going to allow a mere regulatory agency to usurp control over the news media, the one institution aside from the Supreme Court and the ballot box which can challenge their autonomy? I don’t think so. I concur with your sentiments, Mr. Bohen, but your remedy, while admirable, is unrealistic.
My favorite kind of Grant in local news is Lou.