Newspapers and Informed Citizens
Newspapers are on a downhill slide. The reasons for that are many, but I think poor reporting must be one. Witness this article from today’s Tribune.
To set up a vague description of transparency efforts that Salt Lake City is contemplating, the article superficially contrasts Salt Lake’s (good) plans to the Legislature’s (bad) conduct. The article suggests that the Legislature, in contrast to Salt Lake’s possible actions, is not open, inclusive, responsive or accountable.
Okay. So, what are Mayor Becker’s plans? Well, basically, to be as open, inclusive, responsive and accountable as the Legislature is currently. (Compare Mayor Becker’s plan, as it is somewhat described in the article, to the actual contents of the Legislature’s website. Pick a topic on the Legislature’s site and drill down a few layers into the information that is available – committee and floor debates, history, briefing papers, votes, etc.).
The Tribune’s repeated portrayal of the Legislature, regarding openness, inclusiveness, responsiveness and accountability, doesn’t wholly mesh with fact – at least when the Utah Legislature is actually compared to other governmental entities. By no means do I think the Legislature is perfect. But, I believe the reality is that it is better than most other governmental entities, including Salt Lake City, when it comes to openness, inclusiveness, responsiveness or accountability. If not, I’d like to gather examples of stars by which we should navigate.
Rather than stake out a position of scholarly detachment, newspapers made a move to match the “approachability” (a.k.a., shallowness) of other media, such as television and radio. Those other media forms are more immediate and more transient. Things are said, to be quickly rebutted and/or forgotten. If a radio personality or blogger botches something, he can easily elaborate or describe and correct the error. Newsprint, by contrast, is static. It is intended to be contemplated. To have value, it has to be accurate from the outset. And, it needs to have depth that the other media forms aren’t as well suited to provide.
Read a well-reported story from a great reporter, and imagine television or radio trying to convey the same detailed analysis. Newsprint is a unique communication venue. The story comes unchallenged from one writer – without other talking heads, without callers, without links (unfortunately), and without “active” feedback (unlike bloggers, newspaper writers don’t engage commenters to their on-line stories (unfortunately)). Where newspapers sacrifice accuracy and depth, they give up their reason for existing.
Apologists for Old Media believe it offers something new media doesn’t. It can and it should. But, does it? Look at the Tribune story again. What substance does it convey that a blogger couldn’t convey or, more to the point, wouldn’t convey with more depth and accuracy?
In any event, I’ll give you one reform I would like to see at the Legislature. Documents handed out to committees or on the floor should be made available on-line. Those “last-minute” documents are intended to sway outcomes, and often do sway outcomes. Thus, they should be open to the public’s examination.
Many of those documents are embarrassingly simplistic and deceptive – intended to stir passions at the time of voting, when it is too late to fact-check the documents’ assertions. If they became part of an open and permanent record, the documents might become more honest and substantive. Or, even if they remain trite and deceptive, they could be used as “smoking guns” for future reform. Someone could later argue, “At the time of the vote, advocates of the law argued X, as you can see here. I now submit clear evidence to show that the argument was false and that advocates had to know it was false at that time the document was circulated.”
I am always interested in improving the Legislature and doing a better job of opening state government to public examination – and, with that, public participation. I think I’ve walked the walk on that score, and I think the Legislature has too. And I again want to express my understanding that the Legislature can do better. But, meaningful improvement requires meaningful dialogue. Items have to be thoughtfully presented and thoroughly contemplated. I am very grateful that many Utahns take the time to discuss politics on-line. I think it helps the process.
UPDATE (9 p.m.): the on-line article has changed significantly, since I wrote the post above. Perhaps the print article was more detailed than the online version originally posted and that content was added. Or maybe the Trib just fleshed it out a bit. In any event, the new version is much better, and it even contains a link to SLC's webpage on the project. Hooray!
By the way, I'm a Becker fan. I support this initiative, and I am proud of the way he's mayoring our Capital City. I disagree with some of his decisions, but I think he's solidly in line with his constituency. And, as he did while in the Legislature, I think he handles himself with class.
To set up a vague description of transparency efforts that Salt Lake City is contemplating, the article superficially contrasts Salt Lake’s (good) plans to the Legislature’s (bad) conduct. The article suggests that the Legislature, in contrast to Salt Lake’s possible actions, is not open, inclusive, responsive or accountable.
Okay. So, what are Mayor Becker’s plans? Well, basically, to be as open, inclusive, responsive and accountable as the Legislature is currently. (Compare Mayor Becker’s plan, as it is somewhat described in the article, to the actual contents of the Legislature’s website. Pick a topic on the Legislature’s site and drill down a few layers into the information that is available – committee and floor debates, history, briefing papers, votes, etc.).
The Tribune’s repeated portrayal of the Legislature, regarding openness, inclusiveness, responsiveness and accountability, doesn’t wholly mesh with fact – at least when the Utah Legislature is actually compared to other governmental entities. By no means do I think the Legislature is perfect. But, I believe the reality is that it is better than most other governmental entities, including Salt Lake City, when it comes to openness, inclusiveness, responsiveness or accountability. If not, I’d like to gather examples of stars by which we should navigate.
Rather than stake out a position of scholarly detachment, newspapers made a move to match the “approachability” (a.k.a., shallowness) of other media, such as television and radio. Those other media forms are more immediate and more transient. Things are said, to be quickly rebutted and/or forgotten. If a radio personality or blogger botches something, he can easily elaborate or describe and correct the error. Newsprint, by contrast, is static. It is intended to be contemplated. To have value, it has to be accurate from the outset. And, it needs to have depth that the other media forms aren’t as well suited to provide.
Read a well-reported story from a great reporter, and imagine television or radio trying to convey the same detailed analysis. Newsprint is a unique communication venue. The story comes unchallenged from one writer – without other talking heads, without callers, without links (unfortunately), and without “active” feedback (unlike bloggers, newspaper writers don’t engage commenters to their on-line stories (unfortunately)). Where newspapers sacrifice accuracy and depth, they give up their reason for existing.
Apologists for Old Media believe it offers something new media doesn’t. It can and it should. But, does it? Look at the Tribune story again. What substance does it convey that a blogger couldn’t convey or, more to the point, wouldn’t convey with more depth and accuracy?
In any event, I’ll give you one reform I would like to see at the Legislature. Documents handed out to committees or on the floor should be made available on-line. Those “last-minute” documents are intended to sway outcomes, and often do sway outcomes. Thus, they should be open to the public’s examination.
Many of those documents are embarrassingly simplistic and deceptive – intended to stir passions at the time of voting, when it is too late to fact-check the documents’ assertions. If they became part of an open and permanent record, the documents might become more honest and substantive. Or, even if they remain trite and deceptive, they could be used as “smoking guns” for future reform. Someone could later argue, “At the time of the vote, advocates of the law argued X, as you can see here. I now submit clear evidence to show that the argument was false and that advocates had to know it was false at that time the document was circulated.”
I am always interested in improving the Legislature and doing a better job of opening state government to public examination – and, with that, public participation. I think I’ve walked the walk on that score, and I think the Legislature has too. And I again want to express my understanding that the Legislature can do better. But, meaningful improvement requires meaningful dialogue. Items have to be thoughtfully presented and thoroughly contemplated. I am very grateful that many Utahns take the time to discuss politics on-line. I think it helps the process.
UPDATE (9 p.m.): the on-line article has changed significantly, since I wrote the post above. Perhaps the print article was more detailed than the online version originally posted and that content was added. Or maybe the Trib just fleshed it out a bit. In any event, the new version is much better, and it even contains a link to SLC's webpage on the project. Hooray!
By the way, I'm a Becker fan. I support this initiative, and I am proud of the way he's mayoring our Capital City. I disagree with some of his decisions, but I think he's solidly in line with his constituency. And, as he did while in the Legislature, I think he handles himself with class.
posted by steve u. at 1/06/2009
Subscribe
10 Comments:
Yes, it's a lame premise and a lame article. An editor should have at least required a re-write of the first sentence. A much more interesting article can be found here:
http://deseretnews.com/article/1,5143,705275356,00.html
Well said. I like your idea about all documents being instantly available on the internet.
Radio is awesome
Online documentation is definitely the future of any open governing body.
That said, it's a bit contrived to complain about the Trib's juxtaposition of examples with a "compared to other governing bodies" defense. Our legislature is only as open as the public has forced them to be, and without that pressure, would be as closed as a box turtle.
Newspapers and "old media" are suffering from a sensation addicted public, and too often seek the advertising dollar rather than original reporting. But without "old media" new media has nothing to chew. Bloggers cannot carry out investigative journalism the way the Trib or D-News can. Publicly funded news organizations fare even better in contrast (having no pressure to write for sales, rather than public education).
Manufactured cries of "biased media" (some of which I remember coming from this very blog, Steve) have blurred the real problem undermining the integrity of our "old media." But without that "old media" we have very little media at all.
I've been blogging for several years now, and I get the majority of my information from blogs these days. I host a radio show and the majority of the content for the show comes from what I read on the blogs. But if you step back and take a broad look, the information bloggers are churning through is generated almost entirely by what you're referring to here as "old media."
One piece of shoddy journalism, or one less than objective article too often produces misguided outrage at our media, but the solitary problem is that they are dollar driven corporations now, not watchdogs of democracy.
Pen some legislation to solve that problem, and we bloggers will take you seriously when you malign them with your defensive outrage.
The legislative page the Senator speaks of is one of the best in the nation. In fact it would be hard to argue otherwise. The Trib has a hard time saying anything good about republican projects but if its got a dem involved watch out for the gushing.
What a timely post. I was thinking about this very issue of the role of media in civic discourse.
I hope you introduce legislation requiring that floor handouts be available online at the time of debate.
I think that you are right that newspapers have the ability to offer something that is lacking in other media but that they often don't. I also think that Jason is looking in the right direction to spot the real problem - the legislature is usually only responsive when we the people put pressure on them (although I really think that their current transparency exceeds what I would have expected from the pressure that I have observed).
On the other hand, I disagree with Jason that bloggers would have no material without old media. Certainly there are many bloggers like that, but not all. He admits that most of his material comes from other blog sources, but he does not seem to realize that there are also many bloggers who work hard to provide original content.
Old media, like the legislature, will only respond when people put pressure on them to perform the function that they are uniquely suited to perform. People can use new media as a means of applying that pressure, but the reality is that we need a good mix of old and new media and we really need an informed and engaged citizenry.
BTW Senator, when do you change your blog subtitle?
Thanks for the reminder, David. I'll make that change to the blog title.
Apologies, if this reads as "defensive outrage." I thought I was just making a few observations.
I care about newspapers enough to repeatedly write about them, because I love newspapers (always have) and want them to succeed. They have performed a very valuable role in maintaining our liberty. They still can, but not with shallow reporting.
I don't think newspapers will cease to exist. We need the newsrooms. We need people who receive predictable paychecks to gather facts. In my opinion, we do need professionals.
But, like we're seeing in other industries, I think we're seeing consolidation. It's not enough now, for a reporter to merely have a title and a predictable paycheck. A reporter has to add value to the discussion. Newspapers and reporters that add value will do just fine.
The Trib, for example, adds value. My occasional chiding aside, I think the Trib offers good reporting. On the thing I know best -- legislative activity -- I actually think it does a good job. But, as I mentioned in this post, it has some biases that distort its clarity and, therefore, its effectiveness at promoting informed dialogue.
I agree that radio and TV are superficial. You, and everyone, has to realize that in the online age of print journalism, newspapers (like all other media) are in a race to post what they have when they have it. Thus, they post what they get and update as the day goes on. What you see to begin with is not usually what will run in the paper, and no version of a story is ever final. You make some good points, but your ignorance regarding the media is very clear by your comments.
I'm with David on the last minute documents. What can be done to get those published online and made part of the official record, and how soon can it happen?
good
<< Home