HolyCoast: A Bailout for Newspapers?
Follow RickMoore on Twitter

Thursday, January 01, 2009

A Bailout for Newspapers?

Should the government invest millions (or billions) to ensure you can still get a daily paper in your hometown?
NEW YORK (Reuters) - Connecticut lawmaker Frank Nicastro sees saving the local newspaper as his duty. But others think he and his colleagues are setting a worrisome precedent for government involvement in the U.S. press.

Nicastro represents Connecticut's 79th assembly district, which includes Bristol, a city of about 61,000 people outside Hartford, the state capital. Its paper, The Bristol Press, may fold within days, along with The Herald in nearby New Britain.

That is because publisher Journal Register, in danger of being crushed under hundreds of millions of dollars of debt, says it cannot afford to keep them open anymore.

Nicastro and fellow legislators want the papers to survive, and petitioned the state government to do something about it. "The media is a vitally important part of America," he said, particularly local papers that cover news ignored by big papers and television and radio stations.

To some experts, that sounds like a bailout, a word that resurfaced this year after the U.S. government agreed to give hundreds of billions of dollars to the automobile and financial sectors.

Relying on government help raises ethical questions for the press, whose traditional role has been to operate free from government influence as it tries to hold politicians accountable to the people who elected them. Even some publishers desperate for help are wary of this route.

Providing government support can muddy that mission, said Paul Janensch, a journalism professor at Quinnipiac University in Connecticut, and a former reporter and editor.

"You can't expect a watchdog to bite the hand that feeds it," he said.

On Wednesday's Special Report Bill Sammons described 2008 as the year journalism died because of the way the press was so desperately in the tank for Obama and the Democrats. Does anyone think that providing government support for newspapers would make them more objective?

If they can't get enough eyeballs in their town to read their product and attact advertisers, they have to go. Taxpayers have plenty of other sources of information (like Internet blogs, for instance).

No comments: