Download issue (PDF) - Nieman Foundation - Harvard University

Words & Reflections
Both books significantly add to the
growing chorus of concern about the
very serious threat to democracy resulting
from the increasing concentration
of newspaper ownership. They
remind us that institutional owners of
newspapers and other media will, if
left unchecked, continue their relentless
disinvesting in journalism and community
service. These financial investors
have no choice, nor do they care.
They have a singular fiduciary responsibility.
It is maximize profits and
keep stock prices up. It drives a shortterm
business mentality that leads to
disinvestment as a means of maintaining
profits. Community service and
quality journalism have no value to
them.
Each chapter of “Breach of Faith”
takes the reader through a specific area
of disinvestment that has been brought
on by ownership concentration. The
chapters on less state house coverage
and less training provide excellent examples.
A Forceful Response
Still, there are missing elements I would
have liked to have seen in the book,
elements I hope Roberts and Kunkel
address next. The two of them should
speak out more in their own voices.
Now that the dialogue around ownership
concentration and its disinvestment
in journalism and community
service has started, we have a host of
books and articles that try to slice, dice
and analyze the problem. To anyone
paying even a little attention, the case
has been made. Even casual newspaper
readers have noticed the increasing
blandness and narrowness of most
of America’s corporate-owned newspapers.
Local television and radio news
now have little or no substance. “If it
bleeds, it leads” is more true today
than ever.
What we need are respected voices
like Roberts and Kunkel speaking forcefully—from
their own experiences and
in response to what they see happening
in our industry—about this devolution
of journalism, why it matters, and
what the solutions are. In short, it
matters because democracy cannot
function well and will not survive if it
doesn’t have an independent press with
a variety of voices and a genuine commitment
to journalism and to the communities
they exist to serve. Roberts
and Kunkel are well positioned to lead
this discussion and to begin giving visibility
to solutions. Indeed, the solutions
are obvious and easy. The more
difficult questions are whether we can
muster the will to insist on them and
whether we’ve already lost so much of
our independent voice that this story
won’t be adequately told.
I regard four steps as necessary to
solve this crisis.
1. Preserve the Federal Communication
Commission’s (FCC) cross-ownership
ban that it is considering lifting.
2. Preserve and enforce FCC ownership
restrictions pertaining to TV
and radio.
3. Pass new legislation to limit the number
of newspapers and other media
and information channels any one
corporation or person can own.
4. Repeal the federal death tax that
effectively forces independent family-owned
newspapers and other
businesses to sell to large corporations.
The Wall Street money-managers,
who control most of our newspapers,
care only about stock prices, profit
margins, and increasing earnings. They
hire and develop professional managers
whose income and stock options
are based on short-term financial performance.
They do not reward publishers
and editors for journalism, for
community service, for racial and cultural
inclusion. We have entered an era
of newspaper CEO’s, managers and
publishers who rarely have news backgrounds
or sensitivities.
With chains controlling over 80 percent
of America’s daily newspapers and
75 percent of newspaper circulation,
we have pretty much lost our diversity
of voices. Massive disinvestment in
news by the public companies and most
of the large chains has left too many
newspapers with insufficient resources
to tell democracy’s important stories
on either the local or national level.
The worst omissions and the most
egregious ethical failures in our business
increasingly have to do with what
isn’t covered, not what is. Whether it’s
a lack of resources, a lack of will, or a
lack of journalistic sensitivity, ownership
concentration has led to a loss of
the critical independent storytelling
ability that is vital to a democracy.
Important News Coverage
That Isn’t Happening
If “Breach of Faith” has a missing chapter,
it has to do with the lack of coverage
of critical topics, including ethical
transgressions involving the self-interest
of publishers and owners. I believe
the concentration of newspaper ownership,
the control now wielded by
financial-institution investors and its
impact and implications, is one of the
most important stories of our time.
One piece of this story is the heavy
lobbying of the FCC and regulatory
agencies by the large newspaper and
media companies to get rules relaxed
or eliminated to further their desires
for more ownership concentration of
television, radio and cable. Next up are
their efforts to try to repeal the limited
ban on cross-ownership of newspapers
and television stations in the same
community.
A tantalizing question is why the
large corporate newspapers and chains
aren’t aggressively covering this story.
And why they aren’t discussing with
readers the impact of these changes on
democracy and the American public. Is
it their lack of resources and will? Or is
it because it’s not in their financial
interests?
On September 10, I passed through
Chicago’s O’Hare airport. I was returning
to Seattle from speaking at a symposium
on “The Independent Family
Newspaper in America: Its Future and
Relevance” at the University of Illinois.
During my layover, I picked up a copy
of the Chicago Tribune. The lead business
story, with a large photo, was
about an analyst extolling the virtues of
92 Nieman Reports / Winter 2002