It's Our City is a project that uses TV, Radio and Web
to promote civic engagement in the Philadelphia region.Bailout Money for the Inquirer and Daily News?
Monday, February 2nd, 2009 at 2:14 pm - by Stephanie Marudas. Filed under: Economy, Politics.
The Inquirer and Daily News Building at 400 North Broad Street
In case you missed it, the Philadelphia Bulletin has run several stories about how Brian Tierney, owner of the Inquirer and Daily News, had been in talks with Pennsylvania Governor Ed Rendell about possible state aid to bolster the two newspapers.
After some play in the local media, the Wall Street Journal (WSJ) picked up the story and published an op-ed today entitled “Bad News in Philadelphia.” The WSJ editorial board stands against Pennsylvania giving any money to Philly’s newspapers, and suggests maybe Rendell was looking for a way to get good press.
But to get Rendell and Tierney’s side of the story, read the Inquirer’s own report published in Saturday’s business section. Both Tierney and Rendell say they’ve been meeting to figure out if the state could help the newspaper reduce its debt burden. Both denied that any help would compromise the newspapers’ “editorial integrity.” The Inquirer article also includes a quote from a media expert that even disussions about possible state aid to the Inquirer and Daily News heightens “concerns about the potential erosion of journalistic independence.”
Keep in mind, though, that the nation’s public radio and television stations (e.g. WHYY) do rely on a portion of government funding and private donations to help cover operations. By most accounts, public broadcasting is often regarded for upholding journalistic independence and integrity. Take PBS’ Jim Lehrer for example. He’s been a perennial favorite for presidential debates.
Based on that, some of you might argue what’s the big deal if the state chips in to help keep the newspapers afloat? On the other hand, some of you might think taxpayer dollars shouldn’t help fund privately-owned newspapers. Tell us what you think. Should the Pennsylvania state government help out the Inquirer and the Daily News?
For the record, the Inquirer and the Daily News aren’t the only newspapers struggling these days. Look across the country and you see newspapers hurting pretty much everywhere. Some of the reasons why include: declines in advertising revenues, higher production costs, less paid subscriptions and the lack of profit from readers using free online coverage.
Once a bedrock, the newspaper industry has quickly crumbled within the last year. Fewer journalists are on the job now- in newspapers and in other media- than a few years ago. Media experts wonder what the consequences will be, especially in terms of keeping an eye on government and providing consistent in-depth coverage intended to help maintain an informed democracy.
February 3rd, 2009 at 6:05 am
Absolutely not. I am 100% opposed to this bailout. It was a risky and questionable deal form the beginning and there is absolutely no way taxpayer money should be used to keep the Tierney machine running.
February 3rd, 2009 at 10:09 am
Janine, Thanks for your comment. What’s your take on how Tierney is running the newspapers?
February 3rd, 2009 at 12:57 pm
I have mixed feelings about newspapers receiving government bailouts - the potential for conflicts of interest are obvious, but on the flip side SOMETHING has to be done! As a recent graduate from journalism school, I have stared into the abyss for the last several years and seen an industry on its last legs.
Here’s an interesting concept from the NY Times the other day - an op-ed contributor considers turning newspapers into non-profit, endowed institutions: http://www.nytimes.com/2009/01/28/opinion/28swensen.html?scp=1&sq=save%20newspapers&st=cse
February 3rd, 2009 at 2:45 pm
Jess, Thanks for sharing the link. It expands the discussion in terms of thinking about which future alternatives newspapers may have.
February 6th, 2009 at 8:45 am
If the government funds/bails out newspapers, the 1st amendment will quickly come under scrutiny—how ‘free’ will a free press be if that press owes the government money? As for the neutraility of NPR and PBS…heh. Gwen Ifill was hosting in 2008 debates while publishing books on Obama so…
February 8th, 2009 at 9:52 am
I’m offended by a system that bails out large failing businesses, especially when I’ve seen so many of my favourite small businesses close in the past few months. If the internet is becoming the preferred media, then newspapers need to change their business model or they’ll fade away. Throwing state money at something that isn’t working is not a sustainable fix.
March 6th, 2009 at 5:11 pm
[...] the other side of the coin, Columnist Tom Ferrick defends the solution saying “Keep in mind, though, that the nation’s public radio and television stations (e.g. [...]
May 7th, 2009 at 10:25 pm
Not only does it raise ethic concerns, but why would the goverment invest money in a business which is part of an entire industry that is failing. It’s only a matter of time before these newspapers are gone for good, why waste taxpayers money and delay the inevitable.