From Time:
What effect do newspaper closings really have on a town? Or a nation? Depending on a person’s reading habits, the answers to these questions range from “It’s the death of democracy!” to “Newspapers? What newspapers?” But with the demise of two major metropolitan dailies, the 149-year-old Rocky Mountain News and the almost equally venerable 145-year-old Seattle Post-Intelligencer in the last month alone, the issue is becoming a matter of practical rather than just theoretical concern. (See the 10 Most Endangered Newspapers in America.)
A glimpse into what might happen has been offered up by a new study out of Princeton University. Assistant Professor of economics and public affairs Sam Schulhofer-Wohl and Miguel Garrido looked at communities affected by the closing of the Cincinnati Post at the end of 2007, and it’s not an attractive view.
The study is very small in scope, since the Post had a total of only 27,000 subscribers in Cincinnati and northern Kentucky. And it measures only the outcomes in northern Kentucky, since Ohio has not had municipal elections since the Post’s closure. But even with those limitations, a few trends seemed to emerge: in towns the Post regularly covered, voter turnout dropped, fewer people ran for office and more incumbents were reelected. That is, when there were fewer stories about a given town, its inhabitants seemed to care less about how they’re being governed.
Comments
5 Comments so far. Leave a comment below.I think a local newspaper is essential to a community. Local reporters understand the community and its issues. I fear that investigative reporting will die, and democracy will be poorer.
One problem, especially in one-paper towns, is that too many newspapers have abandoned real journalism. They have become mouthpieces for the interests of advertisers and their cronies. That’s why you might see a consumer expose of a small-time repair shop, but rarely examines the practices of a big local car dealer. Endorsements for candidates that have the backing of realtors and builders, but not for someone who thinks that uncontrolled growth isn’t always the best for the community.
And it is far easier and cheaper to publish a newspaper that regurgitates PR press releases than it is to hire reporters that do investigative research. It has always been a problem, but it has gotten worse as locally owned papers have been absorbed into conglomerates.
This has been in the works for quite some time in our area (Portland, Oregon) and Seattle. It wasn’t the Economy that brought this on, it was short-sightedness. If it was just about the economy, and the papers where the best place to find information, circulation would be up. It used to be that the local news-rag was what you bought to look for a job, where you advertised your house, where you looked for adverts about sales. It isn’t, and hasn’t been for a long time, where most of us look any more.
My wife worked for the Oregonian Newspaper for about 6 years. We have had regular discussions about the papers inability, or lack or desire, to compete with the Internet. Most Newspapers Internet sites really stink. Google, Craigslist, Amazon, Ebay and sites like them will be the death of local newspapers. Newspapers draw most of their income from advertising based on circulation numbers. If people can find adverts and their daily news needs (Google News & Cynical-C is what I use) easier elsewhere, they will and local circulation will drop. Our local papers, as well as Seattle’s, have refused to accept that people might go elsewhere for information. They have refused to accept that the Internet is competition, that the news is global not just local, especially to the younger generations.
Welcome to Capitalism, compete or get out of the way. If our local rags go under I will miss them, I read the local papers every day. However I see no reason to keep them if they are unable to compete and I can find more and better information elsewhere… easier. If the Papers want to compete in this digital, current minute world, they need to get on-line and step into the 21st century.
There are plenty of reasons local papers could compete: for one thing, local businesses need local advertising, not national; for another, general online news sources simply cannot cover local news effectively.
People need to feel they are getting value, though, and all the local papers I know are just crap. The journalists on local rags are by and large incompetent or uncaring and the editorial standards pretty slack (there are exceptions, of course).
If may be that print media are just too costly to produce and develop. Maybe formats need to change? I don’t know… but the combination of a need for local news and a need for local advertising suggests that the market is still there, even if the traditional business model is no longer any good.
Most people I know get there local news on line from the local papers sites and TV station sites.
Why are the papers free on line and cutting their own throats?The loss of the actual local newspapers being published will affect those who don’t use the PC.I wonder if they will stop the on line paper if/when they stop publishing the papers?Who will dig up the local news if they go under,do on line news sites hire “reporters” will Joe the plumber be one?