Washington Press Corps: Good News, Bad News
By Susie Madrak Thursday Dec 18, 2008 9:00amOne of the reasons I was glad to leave journalism is that it's now run by media owners who are much more interested in profit margins than in any kind of public service. Newspapers, as far as I know, are still profitable. They simply don't make the kind of obscene profit margins demanded by Wall St. analysts and investors.
What this means, in real terms, is that far fewer reporters will be watching the Beltway store. That's good news - and bad news. Good news that fewer reporters will be tempted to write gossip-driven, negative stories based on their personal dislikes. The bad news is, there will be far fewer journalists watching the store. I predict that once Congress members figure out they're flying under the radar, bad behavior will escalate:
The year was 2000, and Cox Newspapers had about 30 people in Washington to cover the new Bush administration.
Eight years later, a similar transformation is under way, the stakes heightened by two foreign wars and the worst economic collapse in decades, but Cox will not be there to cover it. Cox, the publisher of The Atlanta Journal-Constitution, The Austin American-Statesman and 15 other papers, announced this month that its Washington bureau would simply close its doors on April 1.
Cox is not alone. Another major chain, Advance Publications, owner of The Star-Ledger of Newark, The Plain Dealer of Cleveland and other papers, just closed a Washington bureau that had more than 20 people.
Like a number of smaller papers, The San Diego Union-Tribune recently shuttered its bureau, which had four people at the end. Three years ago, the parent company, Copley Press, had an 11-person bureau in Washington, but it has since sold most of its papers.
Those that remain have cut back drastically on Washington coverage, eliminating hundreds of journalists’ jobs at a time when the federal government — and journalistic oversight of it — matters more than ever. Television and radio operations in Washington are shrinking, too, although not as sharply.
The times may be news-rich, but newspapers are cash-poor, facing their direst financial straits since the Depression. Racing to cut costs as they lose revenue, most have decided that their future lies in local news, not national or international events. That has put a bull’s-eye on expensive Washington bureaus.
Login or Register to post comments.
Pffft, journalists. I'll just get my news from AP wire feeds of RNC press releases. Why do we need to know what's going on in Warshington anyway? Both parties are the sameblahblahblah, the FED is illegalblahblahblah, war is peaceblahblahblah, and so forth...
to the oligarchs.
So they bought up all the press properties they could and reduced them to stenographers for the elites, and 'entertainment' for the masses.
This has been happening for more than 30 years. What year did Bagdickian's "Media Monopolies" appear? 1983. And he was merely charting the development of a well-established phenomenon by that time. A old pal of mine did his dissertation back in the late 70s on "media consolidation"...
and here is our new man at DOI..
http://www.counterpunch.org/doe12182008.html
nice pick Obama
Hopefully somehow the internet will step in and fill the void left by the newspapers in DC. I'm not sure how it would work, but that sounds like it could be a good replacement.
it has a good comics section!
I miss Non-Sequiter.
But I refuse to buy the local Arizona Republic(an)
Finally broke the habit. It has recently cut staff and changed the size of the paper. I hope they're in financial trouble. They've been an arm of the far-right-wing for ages. Their influence is one reason the state went whole-hog for McCain/Palin--and proud of it!
I believe it was at one time voted, by acclamation, the worst news paper in the country. Ran that blonde-headed right-wing 'comic/pundit' on the front page. "Family" owned, iirc.
I pride myself that I never bought a single copy of that abominable rag during the entire 30 years I lived in Norman, between 1994 and 2000.
Get your NonSequitur comics online here:
http://www.gocomics.com/nonsequitur/
the internet has proven to be a better source of info than newspapers--with a couple exceptions. but, for a lot of people not wired-in, that either don't have access/can't afford access to the internet this is not a good situation. and, it is those people, that are crucial to reach.
another aspect of the story--aside from flailing newsrooms, and a revenue shortage--is the sad fact that many americans just don't care about the news/world affairs/current events. given nearly every possible avenue to inform themselves about crucial issues they simply choose not to. yet, they might know every in/out of the recent celeb gossip, or the stats of their favorite ball player, etc. not sure what to do about that...
that for the most part, the blogosphere doesn't report raw news, but simply comments on that news mined by traditional journalists. If the stories aren't dug up by the traditional press, I don't see how trustworthy the on-line analysis can be.
If a tree falls in the woods and no one hears it, the remains of the tree, upon discovery, might have decomposed to the point where it can't be determined with any kind of certainty how the tree fell in the first place.
a lot of sites are dependent on the wire services/cnn/nytimes/etc for a lot of their coverage. and the commentary on news is hardly 'news' in itself.
but, consider something like the wall street blackmail bill. or FISA. or any of the crucial issues we now face that aren't based on some current event in burundi, or la paz, or where ever.
it is those instance where the internet can help give voice to the anti-establishment voices. and, let there be no doubt, there are some serious and committed muckrakers on the web that do break stories, or provide coverage better than anything in the msm or trad'l reporting. (of course, we'd have to have a philosophical discussion on just what "traditional reporting" really is). also, there is a network of indep news and reporting that is interconnected and helps shed a different light on events.
A journalist seeks to uncover facts that the powerful do not want to be uncovered.
The powerful have resources to conceal these facts. They have lawyers, even a cease and desist letter can have the desired effect with a lone journalist.
Once upon a time when Newspapers were robust, editors and the resources behind them would aid and protect their journalists.
That is all but gone.
Is there some cover-up of science and technology by the entrenched powers-that-be? Because that field of journalism is underfunded, too.
The Detroit News (from the right) and The Detroit Free Press (left), operate under a JOA for the purposes of distribution, but not editorial policy. They are in such dire straits that they will now deliver subscriptions only on Thursday, Friday and Sundy(Free Press alone). It's not a matter of the rich actively editorializing in this case, it's a matter of- as Susie talks about above- profit margins.
The question we need to be asking is how do we stop viewing all of our institutions as being competitors for the same investment dollars. What harm is caused when journalism (or, in a field with which I'm well acquainted, healthcare) is subjected to the interests of the dividend check? At what point do these investment opportunities find themselves victims of a sort of Malthusian curve?
If the powerful wanted all of the facts uncovered, they would present all of the facts themselves.
Ergo, the job of the journalist would be redundant.
There are always screw-ups, intentional or inadvertent and there are always attendant coverups.
"Is there some cover-up of science and technology…"
Of course, when a vested interest determines it necessary.
It is human nature.
Web-based news must now move to the fore. If newspapers and old fashioned media aren't going to do the job then we need web-based, citizen-funded media to step into the void.
Our democracy cannot function effectively if there is no one reporting (really reporting) what is happening in our nation, especially D.C.
Our democracy cannot function effectively if there is no one reporting (really reporting) what is happening in our nation, especially D.C.
which is why I predict the coming 'denaturing' of the internet. it provides way way way too much information fluidity for the status-quonauts of the entrenched power/knowledge infrastructure to permit it to long endure without substantial alterations.
That's why everybody who's anybody is so interested in how China handles it. That will then become the template for the constriction of access, content, and connectivity. There'll be a 'deal' made, some kind of quid-pro-quo, as has happened with the inane, sugar-candy world of television. But the best minds in all of IT these days are working on the problem of how to shrink the power of the web...
I reckon it's a done deal, cuz they have all the time and money in the world.
Yes, you and I do, but I talk with folks out here in Wasteland USA who really are too upset to hear about the atrocities. And you and I depend on the internet.
Sometimes I get upset by the news, too: http://cabdrollery.blogspot.com/
on Rick Warren.
It doesn't matter they don't want to hear.
We need to combat ignorance where ever it is with the truth.
Good job.
We need newspaper, otherwise its back to the corn cob when we're all thrown out on the street and living in tent cities
Combating ignorance is easier when it isn't elevated into places of distinction by those who should know better.
Thanks, Mick
Start printing the real news and get rid of the right wing OPEDs.
[Deleted.Your first three words are correct. It is off topic. Please take it to an Open Thread. Thank You. Site Monitor]
I agree with Samson; many people I speak with have only a peripheral knowledge of what goes on around them. When I ask why, they answer that there is nothing they can do about it anyway and it only depresses them to know more. Sometimes I can't blame them.
whats the difference in press conferences ? i been watching obamas press conferences , hes allways got a list of the reporters hes going to call on, and the reporters allways ask the questions obama has the answers he wants to give on his telaprompter, more of the same change my ass! its like a rigged game of cards!
"Cox, the publisher of The Atlanta Journal-Constitution, The Austin American-Statesman and 15 other papers, announced this month that its Washington bureau would simply close its doors on April 1."
Howd'ya know it ain't an April Fools joke?
I take the Dallas Morning Nudes, but I ain't sure why. It is mostly wire reports, CNN, NY Time, and waaaaaay too much Newscorp. Just today they printed more bilge from that jonas goldbooger, and considering that I have four years in the Air Force with a Top Secret Clearance, an Associate in business, a Bachelor in Political Science, with a minor in Arts and Humanities, and a second Associate in Paralegal Studies, and a lot of studying on my own since I ain't got no one to rock their socks off, I could write a more informed column.
At least since I've sent the DMN an email about stalkin' malkin they seemed to have stopped printing her.
I was never under the impression that journalism was about anything other than ambition and personal advancement. look at this new meet the press clown, david gregory, no value to society at all, just wants to advance his careeer. I see them all like that. bob schieffer is ok, but that's about it.
just a slight bit off. you mention gregory, and schieffer: these are not examples of journalists. those are newsmodels, paid to read a script, support the establishment and look 'professional'
Nobody has the reportorial resources of traditional newspapers. And that's not just on the national level, but on local issues as well. The Fourth Estate is crucial to an informed electorate. I see bloggers and the like as helpful for keeping the journalism professionals on track, but they will never be able to replace the pros.
Somehow, we've got to figure out a model that supports a large corps of professional journalists. That's one reason I keep my subscription to the local metro paper.
As the money starts drying up more writers are writing pieces for think tanks and interest groups.
The NYT is a great example of this and a tool of the pharma industry.
Next thing you know they will be selling us a war!
Freedom of the press...the press is the watchdog of government. The crooks in washington don't like that. Big Business owns the press for now and as the public wises up they are rejecting the right wing slant of the MSM, so goes the profit. BTW,nice story Susie.
If cable news in any indication, raising questions is a lot cheaper, and therefore, more profitable than answering them. If there is good news in this story, it is that more people will go to the web for their news.
to get more readers & advertisers is REPORT SOME REAL, FACTUAL News!
What a notion! Why were newspapers invented in the first place?
Wrapping fish & chips.
When the MSM just mouths what they are told to say why bear the expense of a sham of having reporters on the scene in D.C.?
Login or Register to post comments.