Publishers fighting for readers inevitably push for the best content possible. Whether it's a cunning sports analysis from a beloved columnist or good government writing from an ace reporter, top editors are always looking to bring the best journalism to their pages -- especially if their readers have another newspaper in town they can take their subscription to when not satisfied. But, when one newspaper monopolizes a market too often the result is a downgrade in customer service, quality (expensive) journalism and investment in talented (expensive) staff.
After all, why invest profits back into the product when you're the only game in town?
One of the few remaining two-newspaper towns might soon be one. The E.W. Scripps Co., the owner of the Rocky Mountain News in Denver, recently announced it is seeking a buyer for the 149-year-old newspaper. If a qualified buyer is not found by the first quarter of 2009 the paper will likely close. Much has been written about the Rocky's possible closure and the many good journalists who will be thrown into a market unable to absorb them. But, what about the impact on media's First Amendment duty in Denver?
Unfortunately, it will most likely suffer.
With no daily competition and only one place for readers to go, the lone remaining daily, The Denver Post, will likely no longer feel the same pressure to invest the same resources into expensive investigative journalism and coverage of government as it does today. After all, if readers don't feel they are receiving the best newspapering in town where are they going to turn?
Although in better shape than the Rocky, the Post is only just above water itself. Publisher Dean Singleton told union bosses representing the newspaper's employees last week that $20 million in operating expenses must be cut and Moody's Investors Services recently downgraded the bond rating of the Post's parent company, MediaNews, further into "junk bond" territory. With such tumultuous financial times facing the Post, it's doubtful the newspaper will take this monopolistic opportunity to upgrade its investment in watchdog journalism.
Coverage of the upcoming 2010 election could be one of the first "big" First Amendment stories negatively impacted by the closure of the Rocky. The 2010 election will be the most important in a decade due to redistricting that will occur afterward. When politicians go to slice up the map and shape new districts to their liking and political lean, the party in control will have the upper hand. Currently, both the Post and the Rocky cover statewide elections with zeal. They have to. Many readers, both in print and online, turn to newspapers for information about candidates, campaigns and the election season. Typically, advertising revenue increases during an election season along with interest in the news. With only one major metro newspaper operating in Colorado by 2010, political coverage could be jeopardized.
It's no secret that publications are often "in the tank" for certain political causes or politicians. Media bias is as old as the printing press. As a journalist, I truly believe most reporters feel a sense of duty to bring objectivity to their political coverage but many editorial boards don't. With only one major newspaper in Colorado dedicating the resources and the time to follow important candidates and campaigns, residents run the risk of getting election news from only one source, bias and all.
Taking political bias out of the conversation all together, yet another concern arises: A total lack of coverage in the first place.
It's expensive to take a reporter and photographer out of the newsroom in order to follow gubernatorial and Senate candidates around the state. Hotel rooms, mileage reports and daily out-of-office expenses add up quickly. In the old days, editors had no choice but to go with the candidates. If they didn't follow the campaigns to the smallest podunk towns across the state their competition would and valuable readers would be lost. But, without competition the decision to keep the reporter and photographer in the newsroom and let the campaigns go it alone will be more tempting. And, as any politician will tell you, a promise made when no one is listening really isn't a promise at all.
Coming soon: Why community newspapers and wire services such as the Associated Press can't fill the void.
No comments:
Post a Comment