If 'Real Journalism' Fails As A Business, Should Government Step In?

The chart to the right, which shows the stock price of the New York Times Company (NYT) over the last five years, is somewhat representative of the state of print journalism in general. They’re getting their lunch eaten on the revenue end by Craigslist and (to a lesser extent) on the page view end by blogs and other alternative news sources. 

When the business model of “real journalism” fails, what should society do in response? When things are considered important, but can’t be supported with a business model, government sometimes steps in. National parks, highways, police and national defense are all examples. Should print journalism be next?

Last week Ralph Whitehead wrote about the issue for the Boston Globe, but said government must not step in. Today at a session led by Jeff Jarvis at the World Economic Forum in Davos, Switzerland, noted Free Speech lawyer and Columbia University President Lee Bollinger said it should be considered as a viable solution to the problem. Carl Lavin at Forbes picked up the story, and I’m now squarely in the middle of it.

At first Bollinger only mentioned it as an idea put forward by others. When I questioned him, he said he supported the notion.

The idea is both dangerous and absurd. For Bollinger, who is a free speech advocate, to even consider the idea suggests he hasn’t thought through the consequences of the government financing the press. Freedom of the press is one of the most important checks on government. If they’re paying the bills, the press is no longer independent.

Print media is wonderful, and it would be a shame to ever see it fail. But these are businesses that need to sustain themselves in one way or another. Looking for a government handout to perpetuate a quaint but outdated way of life is the last resort of the desperate. It should be avoided at all costs.

Comments

[Phil G.]

The idea of a government bailout of newspapers is the most outrageous thing I've heard in awhile - and there's been a lot of outrageous stuff recently! Let technology and human endeavor run its course.

[Chris White]

It is an interesting question. The banks derivative based business model and Boolean risk switches have failed, and they are being supported, directly, and indirectly with inflation. The defense industry is also supported in the same way, perhaps as an uneconomic capability which wouldn't function without its government customer, and is unable to diversify into other markets. Air traffic control, does that count? There's probably other nationalized industries in the government's pockets, secondary mortgage market organizers, so why not takr over failing journalism models. They are close to the New York Times, swapping out secrets the Times agrees not to publish, it seems, for continued daily access on stuff it can publish.

But why should the government be limited to failed or failing business models like these?

If government was going to get into the media business wouldn't it make sense to do it properly? One company, full multi-media access across the entire spectrum, from cell-phones and blackberries to TV and movies houses distributed through all means. Establishment of an officially sanctioned training program for journalists so that they know stuff. Cooperation between journalists and the diplomatic and military services around the world.

Oh, perhaps Madison Avenue should be included in the mix too. That way there wouldn't be any disorienting shocks caused by changes in coverage reflecting changes in ownership.

[Socialism +Fascism]

equals a managerial state. It is at our doorstep. Do we accept it with open arms? Of course! Our society thrives on propaganda and disinformation!

[TristanYates]

The BBC is publicly funded and is one of the world's best news gathering organizations. However, it is much too soon to declare journalism dead obviously. Print perhaps, but then the model will change to television + internet + free lightweight paper, and perhaps that's more efficient.

[CN]

As a publisher of a small community newspaper I disagree with many of your comments about the state of our industry but agree with your conclusion. Newspapers have been supported since their inception by advertising dollars. Craig's list may have an impact on some classified categories but it certainly can't take the credit for any significant change in our profit picture. Largely changes in newspaper advertising have been affected by changes in the retail industry. The number of small to mid-size retailers, traditionally strong advertisers, have been greatly diminished and replaced with fewer mega-stores and on-line businesses. This is a response to consumers who want the lowest prices everday and the largest possible selection - a concept that fit into their busy lifestyle more effectively than comparing sale prices in newspaper ads and driving from store to store. Traditional newspaper companies are reacting to the changes in the marketplace and diversifying their offerings to the information consumer. Whether it be through hyper-local print products, magazines or a variety of on-line offerings, the industry is merely going through the same pains that come with any major societal shift. There will always be a place for a free press unfettered by government control.