LETTERS: Imagining a Non-Profit Newspaper Serving Public Trust

By: Jay DeFoore Northwestern University Journalism Professor Joe Mathewson's column yesterday offering practical solutions for how a newspaper could go the non-profit route touched a nerve with several of our readers. Below is a sampling of diverse opinions on the column, which can be found here.

***

Saving Newspapers

Thinkers make a country great. Thanks to Joe Mathewson for thinking this one through. Now, if moderate thinking citizens could just get their radical representatives in government to agree to change the rules to help citizen founded non-profit newspapers to start up and thrive. Sadly, the way our country is headed, I think our governors would prefer to support propaganda, rather than information.

Mary Hooper
Bakersville, N.C.

***

Non-profit Possible in San Diego

The LA Times reported that David Copley, who recently had a heart transplant, has looked at the idea of turning the San Diego Union-Tribune into a non-profit when the day comes that he passes away.

Gary Warner
Travel Editor
The Orange County Register

Ed's Note: In his Sept. 29 profile of the Copley legacy in The Los Angeles Times, James Rainey writes: "Several former Copley executives said they thought that the publisher would leave his empire to a foundation, with the proceeds going to benefit charity or perhaps a journalism school."

***

REIT Clarification of Joe Mathewson's Story

Just to clarify the REIT rules, which were somewhat mischaracterized by Joe Mathewson (Newspaper Saved! Newspaper Saved! Read All About It!, Dec. 8), REITs are required to distribute at least 90% of their taxable income to shareholders each year in the form of dividends. In exchange for doing so, a REIT is granted a dollar-dollar deduction from corporate taxation. So, if the XYZ REIT chooses to distribute 96% of its taxable income to shareholders, it is subject to taxation only on the 4% it retains. It is not a blanket exemption from taxation, however, and the tradeoff is that REITs are left with less cash on hand than non-REITs.

Jay Hyde
Vice President, Communications
National Association of Real Estate Investment Trusts (NAREIT)

***

Regarding Joe Mathewson's Article

Why can't more people with Joe Mathewson's outlook on newspapers be among the ranks of our government and among those with the financial resources (i.e. ownership of newspapers) needed to make the important and valuable changes he suggests for newspapers.

The pundits say newspapers are dinosaurs, but they don't have to be. Many newspapers that have managed to keep running have lost much of their influence because they are subject to corporate, late-capitalist greed in the form of the desire to maximize profits at the expense of quality journalism that serves readers and the greater public good. Economics in this country have progressed to the level at which big business is no longer serving customers, but bending at the will of stockholders. Newspapers should not be subjected to this marketplace.

Non-profit papers like the St. Petersburg Times and the Christian Science Monitor have managed to retain extensive quality coverage because they are not held to the behest of stockholders who worry that their portfolios might lose value. While for-profit papers cut their newsroom staffs and eliminate foreign bureaus, non-profit papers refuse to give into the tendency to rely extensively on wire services for coverage that is best produced by staffers at individual newspapers who preserve diversity in news coverage.

The difference in quality is clear. While important issues go uncovered in for-profit papers, non-profit papers haven't abandoned quality journalism and are performing their civic duties. They are giving voice to those who otherwise wouldn't be represented and are bringing attention to the issues that otherwise would go unnoticed.

Mathewson's proposal is realistic and needs implementation now more than ever. Members of Congress and corporate owners need to be pressured to allow for this revolution.

Matthew Stone
St. Paul, Minn.

***

Journalism for Profit or Not?

I've read several articles and editorials lately about newspapers and their falling circulation figures. Blaming the Internet seems to be the popular thing to do. Your idea of a non-profit model is unique, at least to me. That way, you say, you can publish what you want without fear of reprisal or outside control being exerted. That solution alludes to the real problem, and it is what you write. It's the product itself, just as it usually is when a company has revenue issues.

Do editors ever pay attention to the letters that are written complaining about biased or inaccurate coverage of the news? I see such letters regularly. Editor's replies are predictable. 'We' are right or 'we' have justification for what we printed. That letter writers frequently predict coverage, and do so accurately, because of the biases in journalism doesn't seem to ever hit home. Sometimes an event is mischaracterized. Sometimes coverage is unbalanced. Readers keep score, and for many readers, the two go together.

The times are changing and despite readers telling editors what they want, the papers are not going along. They persist in following an old model that worked when they were the only game in town, just as GM and Ford and Chrysler did when the Japanese started marketing products here. There are other sources of news now, but the papers have not responded by changing the way they do business. The semiconductor makers changed when Japan showed up and they prospered. Detroit didn't change anything except paint schemes and is having trouble except when they give away their product.

If you think customer service consists of getting the paper delivered on time, continue to ignore letters from readers, but do some market research and see what comes out of it. There are a lot of people who have canceled subscriptions because they are tired of the bias in the news. Lately, that subject has been spoken of more and more openly, and critically. Who wants news that can't be trusted? Verify stories when you find them. Who wants news that can't be trusted?

There's a message here.

Joe Dantone
Austin, Texas

***

Question for Joe Mathewson

About foundations owning newspapers: Is there not some issue about their doing this, that led the Jesse Jones foundation (Houston Endowment) to have to sell off the Houston Chronicle?

David Sullivan

Ed's Note: If there is, we're not aware of it. Those in the know can e-mail us at letters@editorandpublisher.com.

***

Re: Placement of 9/11 Report Card

Re: Media Fell Short in Covering 9/11 'Report Card'

Maybe the media is taking a more responsible look at the political nature of the commission and its report card. I am surprised Mr. Mitchell did not give the media credit for ignoring the fact that Senate Democrats have blocked confirmations that would enable the worthwhile recommendations of the commission to move forward.

But then, E&P does not want to offend its liberal newspaper readership too much.

Bob Bonnell
Director of Marketing Communications
Grand Island, Neb.
Bob Bonnell was managing editor of the Orlando Sentinel in the late 1970s.

***

Serious Allegations

I would like to take issue with your 12/6 column on newspaper coverage of the 'report card.' This 'report card' was not issued by the 9/11 commission. There are no 9/11 commissioners. The commission no longer exists, as a matter of statute. They are the same people, to be sure, but this is a privately funded effort called "The Public Discourse Project."

I think, to put it mildly, that the work of the 9/11 commission and its successor need to be looked at critically, especially by the media.

Report cards I trust are on the former 9/11 commission itself, including those put out by the Family Steering Committee and the September 11 Advocates. An example can be found here.

In light of the dismal report cards on the former 9/11 commission by these groups and others, the recent Public Discourse Project 'report card' to which you refer sniffs like a Roveian 'attack where you are weak' ploy. In light of material I have worked on, the fact that the only A on their report card was in the area of terrorism financing could suggest that the biggest buried bones are in the money laundering area.

Bill Bergman

***

Doubleshot from Horchak

Re: Mark Fitzgerald's Newspaper Beat column, Count On It: Quality Makes Money For Newspapers

Thank God somebody that the Editorial people have respect for is finally pointing this out. I have spent years trying to get this point across and stressing subscriber and non-subscriber discussions on the perception of the newspaper by the public. Being from Circulation the idea never goes anywhere. I find it very perplexing that now as opposed to the newspaper heyday that the department that has the most interaction with the public, circulation, gets ignored when we share what we are hearing when we interact with our readers. I have of course sent many letters to the editor that have been printed in E&P claiming the same thing. I just wish the story were included as one of the 3 at the top of your web site for all to see.

David J Horchak
Circulation Director
The Herald/The Herald Press

Blind on Blonde? Ann Coulter Heckled, Cuts Short Speech

Let's review the facts:

University spends thousands to bring Coulter to make a speech to broaden the experience of students

2600 students attend the speech

100 of those take it upon themselves to ruin the opportunity for the other 2500

And these liberals are the ones who claim to be for free speech? More a case of they are allowed to say what they want. They try to force people to listen to them by using the courts to mandate venues to allow them to speak. But heaven forbid if you want to have an opposing viewpoint. Then you are a racist, or a bigot, or narrow-minded. These 100 people displayed for us the party of the narrow-minded.

David J Horchak
Newington Conn.

***

Re: Gallup Poll Article

I read with interest the poll rating what you termed "professions". Used car sales is a profession? Congressman, senator, journalist are professions? Surely you jest.

I suggest a review of your editing standard at least with respect to the word "profession".

James K. Sweeney, Esq.