Self-styled saviors of journalism John Nichols and Robert W. McChesney packed the fourth floor of Powell’s last night for a signing and lecture on their new book The Death and Life of American Journalism.
I don’t really go in for most Future of Media discussions but and Nichols and McChesney started out proclaiming that they were not at Powell’s to “bemoan the state of media”, which I appreciated. They also gave out the buttons advertising their group FreePress.org and made available corporate media warning stickers you’re supposed to slap on the sides of newspaper boxes owned by media giants. Pretty hip for a pair of middle-aged white guys.
You can read the pairs’ 5,000 word article in The Nation summing up how they think America’s media system should change, or just get the gist from my following bullet points, which are peppered with Nichols and McChesney’s fiery quotes from last night.
• American media is in crisis not because of the recession or the internet but because of big profit-hungry corporations who bought up papers and radio stations across the country and slashed costs by consolidating or getting rid of newsrooms.
• Some stats about “American Media in Crisis”: Every month in 2009, 1,000 people were laid off from newspapers, leaving only 46,000 journalists working in newsrooms today. We’re all doooomed! One hundred and fourty papers closed in 2009 and a lot of those left open are packed with schlock. In the 1980s, there was a 1:1 ratio of PR folks to journalists. Now that ratio is 4:1. When the earthquake struck Haiti, only one American reporter was stationed on the island.
• BUT: “This is not a moment of loss, but of radical transition. Your public involvement will decide whether we enter a golden age of new media or the most dangerous propogandistic moment in American history.”
• American citizens and the gov’t should start considering a free, critical press as a public good and pouring far more federal money into it (while not censoring content). Federal politicians should expand investment in local community broadcasters, ramp up the money for student media in schools and buy up failing papers, turning them into nonprofits.
Thoughts, anyone?
Would federal journalism subsidies and a newspaper bailout improve American media and democracy?
I have thoughts – these guys are completely wrong.
Who is posting ‘propaganda?’ Isn’t that the definition of FEDERALLY paid for news?
Now show them Craigslist and listen to the whining.
That’s nice that they pass out stickers to help people vandalize newspaper boxes – would you appreciate the Merc’s many detractors feeling they had complete right to do the same to your boxes?
God damn it. Please stop making me shift further and further to the right, Mercury. Why is it that every time you champion a cause it involves the federal government taking more money from me and giving it to someone else?
The press is supposed to hold government accountable. Federally subsidizing it reverses the equation.
I draw boners on Mercury boxes but it’s done out of love.
Not to play devil’s advocate here, but doesn’t the press also have a stake in holding private organizations accountable? I mean, The Jungle wasn’t about the Federal Bureau of Meat.
And while Federal money almost always has controls on how and when it can be revoked, advertising dollars are wholly dependent on the whim of the advertiser.
“Self-styled saviors of journalism”? Where did that come from?
Your bullet points neglect to mention that Nichols’ & McChesney’s book, as they
made clear during their Powell’s presentation and enlightening Q & A, retrieves
the lost history of our nation subsidizing the freedom of the press (for anyone who could afford to own a printing press and pay the labor cost) by granting newspapers of any persuasion free postage through the U.S. Postal Service. This was seen by the U.S. founders and first legislators as a necessary addition to the national debt left by the American Revolution (yes our first national debt dates to the first government) in order to protect the Fourth Estate, as a free press was deemed a prerequisite to an informed electorate and a functioning democratic republic. Interesting timing given today’s most activist Supreme Court fall-out from Bush-Cheney’s loading of the high bench by having any constraints on direct corporate contributions to political candidates ruled unconstitutional. Not just PAC shmearing of pols but now direct corporate funding of candidates is on. Meaning that while pols can be limitlessly subsidized by corporations with discretionary budgets, individuals with no discretionary budgets or tax write-offs lose their freedom of political expression by dint of not being granted free broadcast time or press space. My own critique of Nichols’ & McChesney’s prescription for serious journalism being a public good that needs federal funding due to the failure of the market to provide it (isn’t that the definition of health care too?) is based on the demonstrated lack of demand for public scrutiny of legislators and socially relevant journalism. With a lack of demand, any supply of free press simply means more junk mail and any free broadcast channel simply means more public access cable beaming out to Pluto.
*please* get your facts straight, Mirk ~~ the events at Powell’s are held on the third floor. Not the fourth.
@Mitch – I like how you say “retrieves the lost history.” Because that makes it sound much more awesome. How did you ever find it?? I imagine a cave was involved, and maybe lazer security.
Subsidize journalism? Absolutely. There’s no singular, propagandistic voice coming from the federal government, anyway. It’s always too centrist-right for lefties and too centralized and communistic for right-wingers (except when they’re in charge, of course).
Spread the money out. Let Anarcho-Vegan gender separatists, neo-nazi loonies and all groups in-between have their shot at publishing. If they can’t get readership, then cut the chord.
If the gob’ment can subsidize the promotion of McNuggets in China and supply millions every year to sustain those ingrate FLDS polygamist, child-raping freak communities, then they should do their part for journalism and public discourse.
@blownspeakers — I count four floors, unless you count the Couch entrance floor as -1. Maybe next time I’ll stick to the non-controversial “Pearl Room.”
@laylow — thanks for posting the rundown on historic postal subsidies. I wanted to keep the bullet points short and sweet, but you can read more about ye olde federal subsidies of papers in the pairs’ book or in The Nation article.
Mirk: both Burnside and Couch entrances are considered the First Floor since, due to the building being built on an incline, both entrances are at ground/street level.