In search of the solution to what ails the newspaper industry, an investment officer and a financial analyst argued for turning newspapers into nonprofits, funded through an endowment.
"Endowments would enhance newspapers’ autonomy while shielding them from the economic forces that are now tearing them down," David Swensen and Michael Schmidt write in a recent New York Times guest opinion.
I don't know enough about newspaper economics to debate them on the second half of their assertion. I do know a thing or two about the independence of a newspaper — enough to know that their "autonomy" argument doesn't wash.
Here's the key paragraph from their article:
"One constraint on an endowed institution is the prohibition in the same law against trying to 'influence legislation' or 'participate in any campaign activity for or against political candidates.' While endowed newspapers would need to refrain from endorsing candidates for public office, they would still be free to participate forcefully in the debate over issues of public importance. The loss of endorsements seems minor in the context of the opinion-heavy Web."
Wow.
Best-case scenario: Newspapers quietly give up the prerogative to endorse candidates because, as the authors casually note, the Web is just cram-jammed with bloggers arguing the merits of candidates. Smart readers and writers can debate the pros and cons of endorsement editorials — but I'd like this to be a journalistic decision, not an investment-driven decision.
Worst-case scenario: Newspapers (and their attorneys and portfolio pros) read the ban on "influencing legislation" in a restrictive manner. When you get right down to it, most editorials and columns are written to influence the legislative process. For that matter, so are the columns and guest opinions selected by editorial page editors.
You can see my alarm. How many editorials can I write admonishing you to eat your veggies, floss regularly and call your mom on her birthday?
A endowed, nonprofit paper might be financially secure. But its editorial page would be dreadfully dull.
Delicious
Digg
Yahoo
Non-event anyhow.
----------
To read is wonderful. To comprehend art. Falling back to whatever you believed in is NORMAL.
I'm not sure I understand what you mean ...
Can you elaborate?
Kevin Richert
editorial page editor
It won't happen. Hypothetical. Nonprofits aren't boring either.
I edited a newsletter or two, if you mean that in the general sense. Boring was not my goal, bringing attention and interest to the CIL I volunteered for was.
----------
To read is wonderful. To comprehend art. Falling back to whatever you believed in is NORMAL.
Consumer Reports
Critizing our government---
I'm sure everyone can agree a major function of a free press is to provide some oversight over our government.
So,how does a newspaper find it prudent to accept advertising dollars from those same government agencies? ACHD is my main point.
As we all see ACHD advertises on this online version and the hardcopy print- to the tune of thousands of dollars. It is VERY easy to see how if the Statesman writes a condemning article on ACHD or its commissioners or its director, then Mr. Craig Quintana (a former Statesman reporter) can quickly get on the phone and say, "hey, you know we send lots of advertising dollars to you. Either can that story, or we will can our advertising!"
Am I saying this happens? That doesn't even matter. Whether is actually occurs is irrelevent.
It's also note worthy ACHD's Quintana (Communications Manager) has a Sr. Communications Specialist AND a Public Communications Specialist (Robbie Johnson, another former local media personality). Three main P.R. people for ONE agency? Plus there is a Business & Neighborhood Relations position, and the Webmaster. It's a whole staff department for PR. That's WASTEful Commissioners! -- Even when you are running a public feel-good campaign.
It is a fact ACHD advertises BEYOND the public notices. The excuse is for "hiring" (they haven't had opening for a long time). Yet NO other agency advertises on here or in print (certainly not to the extent). ACHD does the stupid little "Ask Mr. Cone" article to create goodwill on the taxpayers. Does the BPD run a regular ad in the paper? Does the City of Boise run a banner on here to advertise for employment? No. If ACHD has job epenings, they can run a classified ad like the other agencies.
But it is EASY to see the possibility. Therefore it's very much like our ethics in politics. It's best to avoid the perception. Period.
There is a reason Consumer Reports does not take advertising.
KR, how does the editorial board justify accepting contractual advertising dollars from ACHD?
ACHD has the right to advertise like any others.
There seems to be a disconnect in your logic. Try to be more objective and realize the not only is ACHD not the only advertiser in the paper, other accounts with stories in the paper also have ads.
The point is that if you don't restrict advertisers based on current news stories that may be negative or controversial, you are exercising a fair editorial judgement.
If they are crazy enough to continue on some cases, how can you really complain?
----------
To read is wonderful. To comprehend art. Falling back to whatever you believed in is NORMAL.
add on
KR, I'll add to this.
You say you would like your editorials and endorsements "to be a journalistic decision, not an investment-driven decision".
When a newspaper accepts dollars from the same public agencies the editors are supposed to be "overseeing" there is an inherent conflict in your 'decisions'. This is exactly like the legislators taking campaign contributions during the legislative session (which I'm sure the editors oppose); except the Statesman's session is all year long.
I would argue the investment-driven factor (advertising dollars from a public agency) can influence your "journalistic decisions". Even if it does not (as the legislators claim) the perception is too damaging to your persona.
The editors/owners should adopt a policy of no govt advertising beyond the public notice section and the classifieds for currently open positions.
A newspaper, nonprofit? Consumer reports would self
destruct if they advertised, they're not a newspaper/media. A newspaper is built on advertising so how does it quit? They're in the buisness of advertising. Crooks shouldn't expect to be let off the hook just because they buy an add. Just because they can buy our representation doens't mean the media is for sale in the same way, they would self destruct like Consumer reports would if they accepted advertising. Newspapers aren't as crooked as polticians!
Polticis, politicians, corporate unAmerica & agri corruption have destroyed America through campaign finance buying air, radio, TV, newspaper ads, & influence most people never think about. Look at the $300 billion Farm bill, a perpetual stimulus sucking the life blood out of family farms & dairies & people are all about this $819 billion stimulus not doing any good? Corporate farms are buying the family farm with our tax $ while they poison US with E. Coli & salmonella, while the FDA & USDA are helpless to even begin to inspect our food supply.
Even when you report conditions as I did at Darigold, interim Gov Risch didn't do squat. Now he's a US Senator cornering Gore with stupid questions like, when will mann kind cease to exist due to gloabal warming? As if anyone could answer his manipulated/trick question, no doubt conjured up through campaign finance so unAmerican corporation & agri corruption can continue to pollute our air & water. Then we have Otter who did the same, protect campaign contributors while the American people consume rotten milk produced in Idaho so he could continue to line his pockets. Otter, like most of our representatives should be charged with treason against the American people & America.
Raise taxes on gas & vehicle registration in a reccession after years of taking $ from contriutors making billions then handing out tax cuts through the Idaho Tax Commission while not getting roads built? That should be criminal & he should be in prison with the meth dealers.
Ever since Nixon/Vietnam, America has been a joke through campaign finance, this current financial crisis is on campaign finance. mtomlin was on this blog lying like a Catholic Priest who just molested an alter boy. What's wrong wuth campaign finance? Republican crooks should be done away with like Saddam & Hitler, they're just as bad in a nice way.
Our representatives are terrorist, only difference is they are nice to you, lie to you, & bleed you out financially through their position in office.
$64 millioin contributed to our representatives & the SEC looks the other way. 9/11 happened because our representatives were so busy living the rich life they never paid any attention to national security. The current financial mess is the same.
The Statesman wrote a series about AIG & derivatives. Brooksley Born, {head of the Commodities Fiturs Trading Commission} testified 17 times before Congress that we needed public debate onm derivatives & our illustious turncoats, including Fed Chairman Alan Greenspan, SEC Chairman Arthur Levitt, & Treasury Secretary Robert Rubin slamed the door in her face & who is paying now? These clowns should be up on charges along with AIG, Lehman Brothers, & any other corporation who contributed.
Instead our representatives reward them with billions while they give themsleves billions in bonuses? $100,000 spent on tar, feathers, a free ride on a rail to the nearest port, & a slow boat to China would have saved US billions if not tillions.
If I were the Statesman & ACHD told me they would turn away if I didn't can a story, I'd tell them fine, remember Larry Craig? We need the media to police politicis because politicians are worse than meth delears.
$$$$$ is all that matters to a politican, America & We the People are the last thing on their mind except through the $ they can steal & cheat US out of. Meth isn't half the scourge a poltician is. Look at Otter, using a kid with autism in his political lies to get sympathy for his crooked ways. That guy is a piece of work.
The smartest thing the American people could do is delist lobbyist like Otter would wolves, have an open season. I'd be the first one to buy a permit. Get me a trophy idiot & mount the jerk on the wall, & show off to the world.
Fish & Game kill wolves that kill sheep & cattle, how are those preditors any different than un-American corporate & agri corrupt influence killing US? It's time the American people wake up & realize these crooks & our representatives are the enemy willing to destroy America so they can profit.
They've sold US out, gave our jobs to illegal immigrants & free trade through campaign finance, & finally busted US. They send the working class to war claiming they are promoting democracy while they steal from their families here in the states! That is the sad truth, America has become the greatest lie ever lived through our mis-representation & campaign finance.
Terrorist know what our governmnet is all about & they're using it because they know our representatives & contributors will sacrifice America for profit.
You nailed it and win for astute thinking today, Greyghost!
First paragraph destroyed the entire line of reasoning put forth by the rest of the crew.
----------
To read is wonderful. To comprehend art. Falling back to whatever you believed in is NORMAL.
This is way over the head of the average Idahoan
All they know is their state's economy is in free-fall, state government here is a friggin joke, and you guys want to argue "Philosophy of Journalism 101"? Gimme a break!
Do your jobs you pantywaists, "report the news (yeah, go out & find it...gasp!) and raise hell". Your parent company's stock closed today at 69 cents; maybe you should remember there's such a thing as "content"?
for Profit
The problem with "for profit" media, is they tend to sensationalize the news to generate sales.
Case in point: This paper and other local media printed and aired a lot of untruths about our village during the 2007 fire season. Can we get a reporter to correct this? No - cause it won't sell newspapers.
Reverse Mortgage!
I have idea, anybody with a mortgage on a property valued at less than $300,000 is free & clear of debt. If we're handing the banks our money, $ we'll be paying down for the next 100 years along with Social Security, what is the difference? We're just paying off the mortgage early.
My mortgage was going to take the best part of my life to pay down anyway, so why not write it off the books instead? It's a trade off! We're giving the banks the money, billions after they made billions, & ran our economy to ground, & we'll have the $ we used to pay on monthly house payments, to spend on the economy.
They thought they got buy with the greatest scam of all time but if we all go with this plan, We the People win, & the banks, well they're on their own. They lost the interest they would have made on our old loans but that is the price they pay, interest they are paying US on our loan to them.
They have billions, will have to loan it to make out. They might have to wait for the economy to pick up as we spend our old monthly house payment & jobs pick up but they didn't care about US so why would we care about them. We're the bank now, we're making them the loan this time, why wouldn't our terms include our mortgage being paid off instead of being held hostage to the tune of billions?
Fight's over, problem solved, economy is on the mend because I, along with millions of other Americans who will pay down this stimulus as they have planned, both of Bush's stimulus, now Obama's, & the trillions stolen from Social Security, were now free of debt. We have the old monthly payment to spend on the economy.
The banks have money to loan to people who want to buy homes. The economy will take off because we all have hundreds or thousands to spend every month & jobs will come back because we have all this money to spend on goods & services.
Why wait for our representatives to figure this out when it's so simple? They didn't know what they were doing
anyway or we wouldn't have been in this mess, right? They didn't know if ther stimulus was going to work anyway, it was a crap shoot, more of the same the economic experts did to get US into this mess to start with.