Newspaper Man..."Pablo Picasso: Man with Hat and a Violin (1999.363.64)". In Heilbrunn Timeline of Art History. New York: The Metropolitan Museum of Art, 2000
It is fashionable to declare (and, for many, rejoice) in the death of newspapers. As always in a complex situation, inevitable change brings unintended consequences. Two stories this week demonstrate that well-staffed newspapers with trained reporters and editors still have an important place in our free society.
The AIG bonus scandal broke for real on Sunday, March 15, when the New York Times featured it above the fold in the Sunday edition. The Times notes the next day:
“President Obama and his top economic advisers scrambled to calm a nationwide furor on Monday over bonuses paid at the American International Group, even as administration officials acknowledged they had known about the issue for months.”
Even now, with newspapers facing declining readership and fear of closings, even with the “good guys” in the majority, only when a media giant like the New York Times runs a story does it becomes “real” to many in power.
In another example, a series of investigative articles by the Philadelphia Inquirer may well have hastened the shutdown of a Bush-era boondoggle at the EPA.
The Associated Press reported on Monday that the EPA would be closing the Performance Track program, which rewarded “member” companies by cutting back on inspections in return for voluntary (and largely unmonitored) environmental controls. According to AP: “The program itself lacked clear plans that connected activities with goals and did not show whether it achieved anticipated results, the [EPA Inspector General’s] report said.”
“Smoke and Mirrors,” an investigative series from the Philadelphia Inquirer, may have played a role in EPA’s decision to reconsider Performance Track, a senior EPA official told the Inquirer.”
The Inquirer found that the program praised companies with suspect environmental record and failed to independently confirm members’ environmental pledges. The report claims that the program became so desperate to find new members that it turned to gift shops and post offices to pad its numbers.
How to ensure that we continue to benefit from a free and functional press while also freeing the media from the unsustainable printing press? Suggestions range from “let them die and the chips fall where they may” to encouraging a not-for-profit model (for example, the well-regarded Christian Science Monitor is a non-profit.) ProPublica, a nonprofit newsroom that “produces investigative journalism in the public interest” began publishing stories last summer, funded by foundations and supported by pro bono counsel.
There’s still a need for professional reporting, which takes time, training and financing….bloggers, bless ‘em, can’t do it all. For each alternative that arises, we must watch carefully, verify and cross check and, as always in American society, follow the money. A well-thought-out national conversation could help us gather the different perspectives necessary to find an improvement to the death of the press. Other thoughts?
Related posts:
Comments on this entry are closed.