|
Chris says that "it simply is not clear what essential service local newspapers provide that either is not, or cannot be, provided by other, cheaper mediums." While I'm not sure how I feel about Sen. Ben Cardin's (D) legislative initiative to help newspapers, I've gotta disagree with Chris's underlying point, and I want to let David Simon, the journalist-turned-HBO-director of "The Wire," explain why.
In a recent Washington Post op-ed, Simon recounts the story of a recent shooting in his hometown of Baltimore, and how because the local newspaper's police reporting team has been gutted, there is almost no check on police power:
|
There is a lot of talk nowadays about what will replace the dinosaur that is the daily newspaper. So-called citizen journalists and bloggers and media pundits have lined up to tell us that newspapers are dying but that the news business will endure, that this moment is less tragic than it is transformational.
Well, sorry, but I didn't trip over any blogger trying to find out McKissick's identity and performance history. Nor were any citizen journalists at the City Council hearing in January when police officials inflated the nature and severity of the threats against officers. And there wasn't anyone working sources in the police department to counterbalance all of the spin or omission.
I didn't trip over a herd of hungry Sun reporters either, but that's the point. In an American city, a police officer with the authority to take human life can now do so in the shadows, while his higher-ups can claim that this is necessary not to avoid public accountability, but to mitigate against a nonexistent wave of threats. And the last remaining daily newspaper in town no longer has the manpower, the expertise or the institutional memory to challenge any of it.
My newspaper column coming out tomorrow makes the case that local newspapers have inflicted serious wounds on themselves - specifically, they have reduced their local investigative journalism, and that has harmed their ability to attract and retain an audience. Indeed, it is true that in many cases, "it simply is not clear what essential service local newspapers provide" - but that's because those newspapers stopped providing those essential services, not, however, because other mediums started providing those services.
That's why I'm with Simon on this one - looking out at the entire media landscape, there's no way the blogosphere/Internet/citizen journalism in its current form can replace (or is currently replacing) the genuinely essential (if diminished) services of local newspapers. Indeed, even the hallmark trophy of blogospheric journalism - TPM's coverage of the U.S. Attorney's scandal - was, at its core, the culling and synthesizing of reportage in local newspapers.
To be sure, it's certainly possible for the newspaper industry to take far more cues from the blogosphere/Internet to make itself both a better journalism endeavor and more viable business. I don't think it's either the blogosphere/Internet/citizen journalism or local newspapers. Both can learn from each other. But the bottom line is that just because lots of newspapers aren't providing essential services, doesn't mean the blogosphere or any other medium is, doesn't mean local newspapers aren't the best venues to make sure those services start being provided once more, and doesn't mean the essential services can be provided for a substantially cheaper cost.
The fact is, by and large, the vast majority of original reporting has and still is done by local newspapers, and the other fact is that really solid reporting takes a lot of time and money. The Internet may lessen the cost of transmitting and reproducing information, but it hasn't substantially reduced the cost of actually reporting stories and digging up information (other than, of course, in the parts of journalism that are computer/database research focused).
And that's the thing: As Simon shows, without the reporting that local newspapers still provide, democracy loses a huge check on power. |
STATE BLOGS
