Column by Cheri Rae
Q: What’s the best pet for a free and democratic society?
A: A “watchdog,” or a free press that informs the public if and when its government officials are up to no good.
__________________________
It’s a riddle straight out of an 8th grade civics book (“American History” by Kenneth C. Davis); one that has yet to be solved.
The class lesson for adolescent citizens-in-training is about the historic case of printer John Peter Zenger back in 1735, who proved his right to publish true information about the egregious behavior of a particular official.
But the nagging question of the ability of the watchdog free press to survive—with so many pressures against it—still looms large today.
Let’s dispense immediately with the word “press.” As much as I love publishing, editing, writing and reading all forms of printed matter, even I have to admit the day of the printing press is over and we’re all headed to the web in ways we may not even envision right now. Economics, instantaneous communication, unlimited distribution, interactivity are all compelling reasons to forget the printed word—in favor of the downloaded one.
That brings us to the other important word, and important meanings, of the word “free.” What publishers know and what the reading public still doesn’t seem to understand, operating a “free” press is not free of cost.
Indeed, it’s very expensive for any professional to spend days chasing a story, researching wrong-doing in detail to get it right; attending and reporting on mind-numbing hearings; developing trusted sources to get the story behind the scenes and engaging in a few dozen additional tricks of the trade.
But we’re left to wonder just who pays the press to watchdog the public officials, when the public officials are so well-paid, well-staffed and well-trained to smoothly evade, trivialize, ignore, and otherwise stonewall the probing of the press?
These days almost no one at all.
The stories of the City of Bell were revealed only because a couple of hardworking, enterprising journalists employed by the Los Angeles Times managed to think outside the box for a while and put aside the press releases that too often pass for leads these days. They did some digging and went back to basics with the kind of good, old-fashioned, time-consuming kind of journalism every community needs.
Including this one.
Locally, we’re just beginning to realize the true cost to this community run by public officials when the watchdog has been de-fanged, tamed into submission and no longer willing to dig up anything on its own. Journalism is not a matter of partisan politics, it’s a matter of paying attention, asking the right questions and telling the truth.
Citizens in every neighborhood—far and near—know a story of a bad project; a terrible process; wasteful spending of taxpayer dollars; a ridiculous lawsuit, a corporate abuse; a teacher who doesn’t belong in the classroom; a public official looking the other way; a developer offering absurd explanations in order to cover-up wrongdoing.
Many government workers, once considered “public servants” provide little or no service to the public, but continue in their positions because no one outside of government holds them accountable. And government work pays very well.
However, in our community, journalism does not pay. Veteran journalists have been replaced by interns getting on-the-job-training. Meanwhile, public officials for the most part operate without fear of media inquiry or investigation. Rarely do the remaining watchdogs bark warnings. And when they do, who listens?
In upcoming weeks on SantaBarbaraView.com, we’re bringing the watchdog function of the press back to local journalism. We’ll be telling the kind of stories reporting that good, old-fashioned, time-consuming, well-researched and objective journalism back to Santa Barbara where we’ve been missing it for too long. In doing so, we will learn just how much our citizens value a free press—and what they’re willing to do to support the public’s right to know.
I’m glad others in Santa Barbara truly value good journalism. But I value it even more when it’s done by trained professional journalists, ones who are up-to-date on the best practices for news reporting and judgement and do not blur the lines between opinion and news writing.
I know more news will be moving to the Internet but so far no one has found a solution to making the Web a viability without many compromises in integrity. I’m hoping one day someone will though.
Reporting without opinion and just solid news judgement is not easy, but it can be done.
Thank you for this and I look forward to the articles.
It’s, of course, true that the printed word is moving to become the computer (iPod/iPad, iPhone, etc.) screened word, and that has a number of implications. Not least, is sentence structure: the prior sentence is too long. And that, of course, affects style and even literacy: think of the considered great writers reproduced on an iPod or even computer screen … and how little they will be read. And structure: even this paragraph is too long: media reports now have paragraphs of a sentence or two or maybe three: peoples’ attention spans are short.
And that leads to substance. Study after study has shown that computer, internet reliance, leads to superficiality. The necessary digging and analyses are rarely done. There may even be brain changes in those young people who, increasingly, rely on screens rather than the printed word, both in schools and on their own. (And there have been no studies that I have seen of the effects on human vision of a reliance on screens: I suspect that it will be similar to the effects on hearing of hours->years spent listening on headphones.)
So, what does this have to do with the press and the critical need for a democratic society to have a watchdog or watchdogs?
Simple: with the decline of the press and the sheer inability of the online press to do a similar job, politicians (we all know who they are in this community, those who think first and foremost of themselves and their careers) will reign unfettered.
Most people seem not to care unless a decision or an issue affects themselves or their immediate neighborhood. Without a press to point out what’s happening AND the implications, few will care and even fewer will know. Civic activist groups will wither away, as is happening or become limited issues, ringing in the same bell, eliciting the sneers of the know-nothings who are content in their neighborhoods.
It’s up to the media to be subsidized – subscriptions to newspapers NEVER paid the salaries of journalists. Advertising does or did. Few online media have sufficient ads (see even popular edhat, mostly volunteer, shying away from most anything controversial and, according to the constant calls for support, has not enough paid supporters and relatively few ads to be a financially successful, on its own, model.)
Imo, the only solution that will work to retain a watchdog press is the BBC model, adopted to an extent by NPR. Otherwise, it’s the private owner who calls the shots, subject to his or her vagaries, as is so for the N-P, as has been pretty much so always. And there needs to have that subsidy in each state and city: a tax on the means of the media, on the sale of each iPod, iPad, i-whatever, that will go to schools of journalism and towards subsidizing journalists and journalism.
It’s a huge many-sided problem. Yes, there’s a lack of accountability. And, yes, too, elections now, even in smaller cities like Santa Barbara, are for those who can raise the staggeringly large amounts needed — and that further sours the public and makes accountability even more needed. …I, feeling frustrated by the situation, look forward to your articles.
I just left a reply, a long and I think thoughtful response, but it didn’t get posted. Oh, well — not the first time that something didn’t get posted here — not censorship as technological censorship. Anyway, I look forward to the watchdog articles.
Editor’s Note: Comment found in the Spam filter along with a few others – will now check that daily.
Thanks! And coincidentally there was a very interesting OnPointRadio interview at 9 this morning with Bill Keller, editor of the NYT on the future of the Times – it’s repeated tonight/KCLU-FM and is podcast, I think.
well at least we have one local news outlet in keyt that does investigative work and holds people, politicians and companies responsible for their actions. it probably isnt popular in such a small town but it is good to know someone is asking hard questions and demanding and getting answers. i especially like those investigations cj ward does.
How will you guarantee that the news stories will be free of the blog editor’s opinions? Earlier archives are not available, but as a longtime reader I recall commentary and photographs with captions that disparaged Marty Blum and bicyclists, among others. Will there be a clear delineation of opinion and news? There has not been this in the past.
Great question, and something that has been discussed… what is the best way to categorize well-researched stories and hard news vs. community profiles, opinion pieces and light-hearted quips? The Santa Barbara View wants to offer a variety of content, but some posts obviously carry more weight. If readers have any suggestions please share your thoughts.
Each article should have a title bar just like sections in a newspaper…News, Opinion, Community Post and perhaps an “Editor’s View” section for all the high school football and ugly shorts butt shot stuff that really doesn’t belong here in the first place.
nothing on this site is really “news.” there is always heavy bias present in posts about happenings in SB. the SB View is a blog. “news” posted to the blog is selective to issues the blog’s editorial staff has bias towards such as bulb outs, BevMo, bicyclists, commercial development, etc. I don’t come to the SB View for news, I come here to see what Santa Barbarians are whining about now, it’s rather entertaining.
The City of Bell scandal was revealed not because two journalists “managed to think outside the box for a while and put aside the press releases,” but because the newspaper’s management was willing to commit the staff, time and money for reporters, photographers, editors, researchers, graphic designers and Web-content producers to work together on this important investigation. Press-release reporting is usually at management’s directive.
I think you should change some words in your post to something of MORE import…
“But we’re left to wonder just who pays the press to watchdog the CORPORATIONS, when the CORPORATE EXECUTIVES are so well-paid, well-staffed and well-trained to smoothly evade, trivialize, ignore, and otherwise stonewall the probing of the press?”
After listening to the #eggrecall hearings, Corporations are the ones that truly need the monitoring for our societies health and welfare.
From the very beginning of our country, powerful private interest groups have worked to limit and overcome effective democratic participation in and oversight of community and governmental affairs. (The literature on this subject is extensive; one of the best of recent books is Adams vs. Jefferson (2004) in which historian John Ferling describes how this counter-democratic dynamic became rooted in American economic and political life.
What was so in, say, 1800 is so today in 2010. Forms have changed; substance has remained pretty much the same apart from this year’s precedent-shattering decision by the sharply-divided United States Supreme Court that corporations come within the meaning of “persons” as the term is used in the Constitution.
This blatantly political decision has greatly enhanced the power of counter-democratic private interest groups to secure their private interests at the expense of the public interest as such is determined by democratic means. Propaganda propounded for counter-democratic purposes saturates the media, such as that coming out of Oxymoronic Fox News and Oxycontin-moronic Lush Rambow.
So go, Cheri Rae! Go! Every best wish for you in your efforts to practice watch-dog journalism in our community, and so to help to preserve and protect effective democratic participation in and oversight of community and governmental affairs.
I look forward to reading what you write and doing what I can to carry forth this work.
Marc McGinnes
Cheri, When I read the responses to your piece, I realized how desperately Santa Barbara needs what you are offering. Good luck. We’ve watched what you did before the View and know you are capable of great things. Don’t be afraid of the nut cases who will always be responding. Many of your admirers are standing behind you. Santa Barbara watch out!