Media Giraffe Project --
Link & reference blog

ORIGINAL URL:
http://www.nytimes.com/2006/10/26/business/media/26cnd-paper.html?_r=2&oref=slogin&oref=slogin
Published: October 26, 2006

HEADLINE: Los Angeles Times Editor Urges Others to Fight Cuts

By KATHARINE Q. SEELYE
The New York Times

NEW ORLEANS, Oct. 26 -- The editor of The Los Angeles Times, Dean Baquet, who publicly opposed staff cuts at his newspaper last month, encouraged other editors today to push back more against newspaper owners when they propose such cuts.

"Sometimes when I sit down with editors and managing editors, I find them all too willing to buy the argument for cuts," he said "We need to be a feistier bunch . . . [i]t is the job of the editor of the paper to put up a little more of a fight than we've been willing to put up in the past," he said, because a public service is at stake. "We understand the business model is changing and we have to do some cutting," he said, "but don't understand it too much."

Mr. Baquet was addressing more than 100 editors at the annual gathering of the Associated Press Managing Editors. He made headlines last month when he and his erstwhile publisher openly objected to cuts at The Los Angeles Times proposed by its owner, the Tribune Company of Chicago. He said he received support for speaking out from his staff and from many newspaper people from around the country, as well as from two publishers whom he did not name and even a Wall Street analyst. Three weeks later, the publisher of The Los Angeles Times, Jeffrey Johnson, was forced out.

Many wondered if Mr. Baquet would step down in solidarity with Mr. Johnson. He did not, and as a questioner in today.s audience noted, he has been criticized for not quitting, although many on his staff urged him to stay. Mr. Baquet said he had considered quitting and had a long talk with Mr. Johnson about what to do. "For me, the paper came first; it even came before my relationship with him," he said. He said he thought he could work with the new publisher, David Hiller, and finally decided "the best way to protect the paper was for me to stay".

Mr. Baquet is now in early budget talks with Mr. Hiller and said there was no set timeframe for resolving the staff levels. A cloud remains over Mr. Baquet's future, not only because he has said he would not make major cuts but because the future of the paper itself is up in the air. The Tribune Company has offered itself for sale, in whole or in part, and said it expected a decision by the end of the year.

Mr. Baquet joked with the editors here that he had come to the conference because he expected to see job booths. When the audience laughed, he said, 'They think I'm kidding." He had additional advice for editors, telling them to be honest with their staffs when they disagreed with their bosses. "It seems like a cliché, but most editors aren't," he said.

Several editors said after his speech that they agreed with Mr. Baquet's advice to speak up. "It's never easy," said Brian Toolan, who until July had been the editor of The Hartford Courant, also owned by Tribune, since 1998. "You don't want to be the cause of disruption in your own shop."

"Some of us talked ourselves into thinking that this is a requirement of management -- to make cuts for business reasons," said Mr. Toolan, who is now the national editor for The Associated Press. "But it is the responsibility of the editor to be clear about what resources are necessary, and not to be clear about it is a gross abdication."

Butch Ward, who teaches leadership and editing at the Poynter Institute, a journalism training center, said that the decision to speak up was especially hard for those who have been making cuts over a long period of time. "A decision many editors are struggling with is, after years of belt-tightening, when do you throw up the window and scream, "I'm tired of this and I'm not going to take it anymore?" he said. "In the end, it's an individual decision."

----------------------------------------------------------------

The article above is copyrighted material, the use of which may not have specifically authorized by the copyright owner. The material is made available in an effort to advance understanding of political, economic, democracy, First Amendment, technology, journalism, community and justice issues, etc. We believe this constitutes a 'fair use' as provided by Section 107 of U.S. Copyright Law. In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. Chapter 1, Section 107, the material above is distributed without profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving the included information for research and educational purposes. If you wish to use copyrighted material from this blog for purposes beyond fair use, you must obtain permission from the copyright owner.

# posted by newshare @ 10:36 AM

http://www.boston.com/business/globe/articles/2006/10/27/local_ownership_isnt_cure_all_for_newspapers

Local ownership isn't cure-all for newspapers

By Robert Gavin, Globe Staff | October 27, 2006

As Philadelphia is finding out, local ownership of big city newspapers
isn't a panacea.

With a local group considering making a bid to buy The Boston Globe from
The New York Times Co., media specialists warned that newspapers,
regardless of ownership, face huge challenges as readers and advertisers
move online, and the industry seeks a financial model to support extensive
newsgathering operations.

In Philadelphia, a local group earlier this year bought the broadsheet
Inquirer and tabloid Daily News from the McClatchy Co. chain, sparking
hope within the community and the two papers for an end to the relentless
cost-cutting under its longtime corporate owner, the defunct Knight Ridder
chain. (Knight Ridder sold itself to McClatchy, which in turn sold some of
the papers it acquired.)

Last week, however, the new owner said layoffs were "unavoidable" because
revenue was falling so quickly that the company would not be able to meet
its debt payments next year. Meanwhile, with the company pushing for deep
concessions in union contracts that expire next week, members of the
Newspaper Guild of Greater Philadelphia, which represents editorial,
advertising, and other workers, last night authorized union leader s to
call a strike.

With tensions rising yesterday, union leaders were unavailable for
comment. Neither was Brian Tierney, a former public relations and
advertising executive who led the group that bought the papers.

"The sentiment of local ownership is noble, but the economics are still
brutal," said Jay Harris, formerly publisher of the San Jose Mercury News
and now a journalism professor at the University of Southern California.
"The good news is the desire to have strong local papers committed to
local service. But the industry is still thrashing around, looking for a
sustainable long-range model."

After decades of big, publicly traded media companies gobbling up local
papers, that trend has recently showed signs of reversing. Wall Street has
been battering newspaper stock prices, prompting companies to cut costs.
The result: Local groups led by wealthy residents are popping up across
the country with hopes of protecting and preserving the papers.

In Boston, where falling circulation and advertising revenues at the Globe
have led to job and cost cuts, a group led by Jack Welch, former General
Electric Co. chief executive, and Jack Connors, cofounder of the
advertising firm Hill Holliday, has emerged as possible bidders for the
Globe. In Los Angeles, entertainment mogul David Geffen is among a group
of local executives expressing interest in buying the Los Angeles Times
from Tribune Co. Local groups in Hartford, Long Island, and Baltimore have
signaled interest in buying Tribune Co. papers in those communities.

Media specialists said local ownership could take some of the cost
pressures off papers, since, as private companies, they wouldn't have to
meet Wall Street expectations. But, they added, they still face the
pressures of paying off loans that typically finance the purchases and
providing promised returns to private investors.

"Even a private ownership group has to operate in the black," said Lou
Ureneck, chairman of the Boston University journalism department.

New owners would have to tackle newspapers' tricky transition to the
Internet. So far, newspapers' online profits haven't come close to making
up for declines in the traditional business.

Another big challenge, said Tom Rosenstiel, director of the Project for
Excellence in Journalism, a nonprofit Washington research group, is that
newspapers operate under a model foreign to most other businesses.
Newspapers' mass audience is their readers, and the circulation revenue
generated by sales to readers is important. But newspapers make most of
their money by selling space to advertisers based in part on the papers'
credibility with readers. That credibility must be protected even at the
risk of sometimes angering and losing advertisers, Rosenstiel said.

"When you have management that has been in the business, they know the
integrity of the news product is what they're selling," Rosenstiel said.
"It's not clear whether the new local owners understand this unusual
economic model."

There are concerns that a new breed of owners, who have largely become
rich in other businesses, would interfere in the newsgathering process to
boost their own financial interests, reward friends, or punish enemies.

In Philadelphia, the Tierney group signed a pledge not to interfere with
news decisions made by editors. The Boston group, so far, has not made any
such pledge.

Stephen Burgard, director of the Northeastern University School of
Journalism, pointed to Santa Barbara, Calif., as an example of the
vulnerability of locally controlled newspapers. At the News-Press, at
least five top editors, including the editor and managing editor, resigned
over interference by the wealthy copublisher, Wendy McCaw, who bought the
paper from Times Co. in 2000.

Among the incidents prompting the resignations was when McCaw stopped the
publication of the drunken driving conviction of one of her loyalists at
the paper. McCaw said in an e-mail that she was merely following the
paper's policy of not reporting drunken driving convictions unless injury
or death was involved. They weren't in this case.

"Local ownership is potentially wonderful and potentially disastrous,"
Burgard said. "The question is, what is their sense of community
stewardship?"

Robert Gavin can be reached at rgavin@globe.com.

© Copyright 2006 The New York Times Company

----------------------------------------------------------------

The article above is copyrighted material, the use of which may not have specifically authorized by the copyright owner. The material is made available in an effort to advance understanding of political, economic, democracy, First Amendment, technology, journalism, community and justice issues, etc. We believe this constitutes a 'fair use' as provided by Section 107 of U.S. Copyright Law. In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. Chapter 1, Section 107, the material above is distributed without profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving the included information for research and educational purposes. If you wish to use copyrighted material from this blog for purposes beyond fair use, you must obtain permission from the copyright owner.

# posted by newshare @ 12:11 AM

http://www.baltimoresun.com/news/bal-bz.sun27oct27,0,4343526.story

Baltimore group seeks to buy Sun
Venetoulis, Embry, Sondheim join bid

By Jamie Smith Hopkins and Andrea Walker
sun reporters

Originally published October 27, 2006

A group of prominent Baltimore business and civic leaders has launched an
effort to buy The Baltimore Sun Co., sending a letter yesterday indicating
its interest to the company's Chicago parent.

Theodore G. Venetoulis, a former Baltimore County executive who lost a
Democratic primary bid for governor in 1978, said he wrote Tribune Co.
yesterday afternoon on behalf of the newly formed Baltimore Media Group.
His letter expresses "strong interest" in acquiring The Sun and other
assets held by The Baltimore Sun Co.

Venetoulis chairs the group, which includes Abell Foundation President
Robert C. Embry Jr. and longtime civic leader Walter Sondheim. He declined
to name the other participants but said that 15 to 20 "very successful"
Baltimoreans have expressed interest, depending on the price, and "there
will be more before it's over."

The Baltimore residents are the latest in a string of wealthy business
people around the country who want to buy their local metro daily
newspapers from embattled corporate parents.

Locals led by Jack Welch, the former head of General Electric Co., said
this week that they were interested in buying The Boston Globe. A group
led by public relations and advertising executive Brian Tierney recently
paid $515 million for The Philadelphia Inquirer and Philadelphia Daily
News.

In Los Angeles, three billionaires, including music executive David
Geffen, have said they want to buy the Los Angeles Times, which also is
owned by Tribune. Yusef Jackson, the son of Rev. Jesse L. Jackson, said he
wants to buy the troubled Chicago Sun-Times.

"Communities are really getting very concerned about corporate cutbacks,"
said Thomas Kunkel, dean of the Philip Merrill College of Journalism at
the University of Maryland.

Even for all their struggles with declining circulation and flat
advertising, many metro daily newspapers still have profit margins of 15
percent or more - one reason why a number of major private-equity firms
reportedly are interested in all of Tribune.

Tribune, which owns The Sun, 10 other daily English-language newspapers,
two dozen television stations and the Chicago Cubs baseball team, said
last month that it might sell all or some of its assets. A company
spokesman, declining to comment yesterday, would not say whether Tribune
had received the Baltimore group's letter.

Venetoulis, who said he has spoken to investment bankers hired by Tribune,
said he believes the group has the wherewithal to make a serious bid. It
has received interest from several large banks about financing, he said.

Participants see the potential acquisition as a social as well as a
business investment, Venetoulis said.

"The group we've put together understand two things," said Venetoulis, who
has worked in the publishing business for 25 years and once owned the
Towson Times. "One, that ... this will not be an investment that will
provide the usual yield and return that some investors will be used to.
... Secondly, they've agreed that they would not in any way attempt to
jeopardize the paper's independence or attempt to give it a certain
ideological bent."

Edwin F. Hale Sr., chief executive of Baltimore-based First Mariner Bank,
said in an interview this month - when rumors were swirling about
Venetoulis' effort - that he told organizers that he'd gladly listen when
a proposal was on the table.

"I think they've talked to most of the corporate people around town," Hale
said. "They're very serious."

Venetoulis said he wanted to get the letter in before today, which he had
heard was the deadline for investors interested in buying the Tribune Co.
as a whole. If Tribune decides to sell the entire company, Venetoulis said
the group would try to negotiate with that buyer instead.

Embry and Sondheim approached Venetoulis nearly four months ago to mount
the effort, as it became clear that Tribune - battered by intensifying
media competition, stagnant revenue and the demands of its largest
investors - might be open to offers. Around the same time, Embry told The
Sun that the Abell Foundation was interested in joining with others for
such an effort.

The founders of the Abell Foundation long owned The Baltimore Sun Co.,
selling it to Times Mirror Co. in 1986. Times Mirror sold itself to
Tribune in 2000.

"If The Sun is going to be sold, ... I think that it would be great if it
was owned by people who want to maintain and restore its quality," Embry
said yesterday. "And I think that the media in the United States should
not be centralized in large, publicly traded companies but should be
decentralized, and have different voices. Baltimore ought to have its own
voice."

But private ownership isn't necessarily a panacea. The Philadelphia
papers' new owners are looking at more layoffs and merging the
publications to make up for sluggish sales and advertising.

Venetoulis said his group sees that as a warning against buying at any
cost. He thinks Tierney might have overpaid.

John Morton, a newspaper industry analyst in Silver Spring, wouldn't be
surprised if Tribune ends up selling some pieces of the company, but he
doubts a major metro daily such as The Sun would be among them. "If they
got an offer they couldn't refuse, they might be willing," he added.

Sun Publisher Rondra J. "Ronnie" Matthews referred questions to Tribune,
whose spokesman, Gary Weitman, would not comment.

jamie.smith.hopkins@baltsun.com andrea.walker@baltsun.com
Sun reporter Tricia Bishop contributed to this article.

----------------------------------------------------------------

The article above is copyrighted material, the use of which may not have specifically authorized by the copyright owner. The material is made available in an effort to advance understanding of political, economic, democracy, First Amendment, technology, journalism, community and justice issues, etc. We believe this constitutes a 'fair use' as provided by Section 107 of U.S. Copyright Law. In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. Chapter 1, Section 107, the material above is distributed without profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving the included information for research and educational purposes. If you wish to use copyrighted material from this blog for purposes beyond fair use, you must obtain permission from the copyright owner.

# posted by newshare @ 12:07 AM

ORIGINAL URL:
http://www.niemanwatchdog.org/blog/?p=27

ORIGINAL HEADLINE:
Gilbert Cranberg: Timidity at Work

Posted at 10:56 am, October 19th, 2006

When Jay Harris quit in 2001 as publisher of the San Jose Mercury News rather than make cuts he believed would harm the paper, he was invited to speak to the annual meeting of the American Society of Newspaper Editors, where he received an enthusiastic standing ovation. When the LA Times publisher and editor recently balked at cuts for the same reason, ASNE was silent. Nor have the Society of Professional Journalists, Associated Press Managing Editors or National Conference of Editorial Writers been heard from.

The Times publisher, Jeffrey Johnson, is now the former publisher, having been ousted. It isn't clear what the future holds for Dean Baquet, the editor. Evidently, Tribune company executives and other like-minded corporate cost-cutters can proceed without fretting about reaction from the organized journalism community.

Why the timidity?

David Zeeck, editor of the Tacoma News Tribune and president of ASNE, told me that the organization's leadership opted unanimously to stay on the sidelines because "we see our mission generally as supporting issues, not individuals" and that "picking sides at this point isn.t something ASNE should do."

SPJ President Christine Tatum, an editor at the Denver Post, said her organization considers it best "not to engage in .personnel and labor matters...The bottom line: We haven't issued any formal statements concerning the Trib/LAT affair because it hasn't been easy to know where the dividing line is between newsroom disagreements/blow-ups and over-the-top cost-cutting."

APME will be a platform for Baquet when he speaks to its annual meeting Oct. 26 in New Orleans. He had been invited earlier. Baquet is expected to speak about the situation at the Times although APME won't. As for NCEW, the organization of opinion writers seldom ventures an opinion.

While it and the others are holding their respective tongues, LA Times staffers by the hundreds have expressed their backing for Johnson and Baquet in petitions.

It took spine for Johnson and Baquet to confront their superiors, and courage in its own way for eye-strained wretches who may be living paycheck-to-paycheck to go on record to support them. Organizations, by contrast, face no peril. Certainly, it would be inappropriate for journalism groups to meddle in the business affairs of news organizations. The productivity of staffers, for instance, is so variable it would be presumptuous and irresponsible for ASNE or any other group to stick its collective nose into a personnel thicket. But courage in journalism, like hard-core pornography, is something you know when you see it. It ought to be possible for editors to fashion a collective salute to the fortitude of publishers and editors, when they deserve it, without taking sides on the pros and cons of particulars.

Journalism groups aren't bashful about speaking up when important journalism issues are at stake. Needed now is a redefinition of journalism issues so that they encompass not just what happens in courtrooms but in boardrooms. The threats to access to the information the public must have in a democracy often come nowadays from the elevation of profits over staffing, newshole and the other measures of quality.

When publishers and editors stand up for readers and staff, they ought to be celebrated, not ignored.

----------------------------------------------------------------

The article above is copyrighted material, the use of which may not have specifically authorized by the copyright owner. The material is made available in an effort to advance understanding of political, economic, democracy, First Amendment, technology, journalism, community and justice issues, etc. We believe this constitutes a 'fair use' as provided by Section 107 of U.S. Copyright Law. In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. Chapter 1, Section 107, the material above is distributed without profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving the included information for research and educational purposes. If you wish to use copyrighted material from this blog for purposes beyond fair use, you must obtain permission from the copyright owner.

# posted by newshare @ 11:12 PM

ORIGINAL URL:
http://www.snpa.org/circuitaddon/ebulletin/10.19.06.htm

HEADLINE:
"Why We are Still Buying Newspaper Companies:
Their Value and Their Future"

From the Southern Newspaper Publishers Association website

Despite the difficult times ahead for the newspaper industry, MediaNews Group continues to feel very bullish about the future of newspapers and will continue to buy newspapers, William Dean Singleton, MediaNews vice chairman and CEO, said at Tuesday's general session at the SNPA Annual Convention.

He acknowledged that there are some who believe that newspapers are a dying business. "We find ourselves in difficult times," Singleton said, but "we're not a dying business. We're in a changing business...and it's changing very rapidly."

He says part of the reason Wall Street isn't convinced that the next business model will be more exciting than the old one is that newspapers haven't proven it economically yet. "This will be a down year for the newspaper industry," he said. "Most newspaper companies will have down revenue from last year and certainly . if not down revenue . down profits, which isn't something that happens very often in our business. Wall Street's not accustomed to that so they're punishing newspaper stocks."

He said that, while print readership is still very dominant, it is declining somewhat. And, print advertising is declining as readers change the way they reach customers. "So, we are going to have a period between the old and the new that's going to be a bit choppy. And, it may last a year or two or three or four." But, he said the bottom line is that . as consumers begin to depend on interactive media for their daily lives . "we'll be there."

As the business model changes, Singleton says newspapers will continue to depend on the things that have made them successful:

-- Good solid local news coverage
-- Being close to customers in their markets
-- Providing those customers with the advertising tools they need -- whether it be in print or interactive, through cellular telephone or ipods, or however they want it.

"I think the future is promising and the business we end up in 10 year from now, in my view, will be far better than the business we have today," Singleton said. "But, we have to be somewhat patient in getting there."

For information about ordering a CD with audio presentations from the SNPA Annual Convention, click here.

----------------------------------------------------------------

The article above is copyrighted material, the use of which may not have specifically authorized by the copyright owner. The material is made available in an effort to advance understanding of political, economic, democracy, First Amendment, technology, journalism, community and justice issues, etc. We believe this constitutes a 'fair use' as provided by Section 107 of U.S. Copyright Law. In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. Chapter 1, Section 107, the material above is distributed without profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving the included information for research and educational purposes. If you wish to use copyrighted material from this blog for purposes beyond fair use, you must obtain permission from the copyright owner.

# posted by newshare @ 10:53 PM

Here is the text of a news released today from opponents of so-called "fake news" -- the practice of U.S. TV stations broadcasting video material provided by companies or PR firms without disclosing the source to viewers. This release was supplied to the Media Giraffe Project by John Staubner of the Center for Media & Democracy in Madison, Wis.

See also:
http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/FCC-05-84A1.pdf
>
> Oct. 17, 2006
>
> FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE:
> Diane Farsetta, CMD, (608) 260-9713
> Craig Aaron, Free Press, (202) 265-1490 x 25
>
> Broadcasters of Fake News Make False Claims about VNR study
>
> Free Press and Center for Media and Democracy respond to smears from RTNDA
> and NABC; groups urge FCC to continue investigation into corporate propaganda
>
> WASHINGTON - In a letter yesterday to the Federal Communications Commission,
> Free Press and the Center for Media and Democracy refuted spurious claims
> made by the Radio Television News Directors Association (RTNDA) and the
> National Association of Broadcast Communicators (NABC), a new consortium of
> broadcast PR firms, about the FCC's ongoing investigation into
> corporate-funded "fake news" on local TV stations.
>
> The full rebuttal can be found at <http://www.prwatch.org/node/5282>
>
> The original report - "Fake News: Widespread and Undisclosed" - is available
> at <http://www.prwatch.org/fakenews/intro>
>
> A copy of the letter follows:
>
> October 16, 2006
>
> Dear Mr. Chairman and Commissioners:
>
> The purpose of this letter is to address allegations made in an October 5,
> 2006, filing with the Federal Communications Commission by Wiley Rein &
> Fielding, on behalf of the Radio-Television News Directors Association
> (RTNDA).
>
> The RTNDA filing misrepresents and distorts the substance of the Center for
> Media and Democracys April 2006 report on video news releases (VNRs), Fake
> TV News: Widespread and Undisclosed. The enclosed document is a
> point-by-point rebuttal of the RTNDA filing (specifically, of the filings
> Attachment A).
>
> The importance of issuing a rebuttal is demonstrated by the October 16, 2006,
> filing with Chairman Martin by Keller and Heckman, on behalf of the VNR firm
> consortium named the National Association of Broadcast Communicators (NABC).
> The NABC filing wrongly states that the RTNDA has demonstrated that much of
> [CMDs report] is inaccurate, misleading and unreliable.
>
> As you know, Free Press and the Center for Media and Democracy (CMD) have
> long been concerned about the widespread and undisclosed use of the public
> airwaves to broadcast VNRs. The Fake TV News report documented 98
> separate instances where TV stations aired VNRs or related satellite media
> tours. Not once did a TV station disclose to its news audience the name of
> the corporate client behind the sponsored segment.
>
> Such practices appear to be clear violations of the Commissions sponsorship
> identification rules. In its April 2005 Public Notice, the Commission
> asserted, Listeners and viewers are entitled to know who seeks to persuade
> them. The Notice goes on to state that whenever broadcast stations and
> cable operators air VNRs, licensees and operators generally must clearly
> disclose to members of their audiences the nature, source and sponsorship of
> the material that they are viewing. These passages contradict the NABC
> assertion that the Commissions actual rules regarding disclosure are
> based on the specific content of any given VNR.
>
> We applaud the Commissions August 2006 decision to launch an investigation
> of the 77 TV stations found airing undisclosed VNRs and satellite media
> tours. As television remains the most popular news source in the United
> States, the routine infiltration of disguised public relations and marketing
> materials into newscasts must be fully investigated. In the months since the
> release of the Fake TV News report, more than 30,000 Americans have
> written the Commission, urging the agency to protect the public airwaves from
> such abuse by enforcing and strengthening VNR disclosure requirements.
>
> The Commissions ongoing investigation of undisclosed VNRs is not an
> intrusion upon First Amendment principles, as the RTNDA filing contends.
> Ensuring disclosure of broadcast materials provided by third parties is
> clearly within the Commissions mandate. It should be noted that disclosure
> does not keep public relations firms from producing VNRs or TV stations from
> broadcasting them. What disclosure does is honor news audiences right to
> know who seeks to influence them.
>
> The RTNDA needs to understand that their members use of the public airwaves
> is a privilege, not a right. When TV stations turn their backs on the public
> interest to air fake news provided by public relations firms, they defy
> the spirit and letter of their broadcast licenses.
>
> Free Press and CMD have confidence that the Commission will enforce its
> sponsorship identification rules in a way that honors both newsrooms
> editorial independence and viewers right to know. To ensure that the
> Commission has the most accurate information available, our two organizations
> submit the following clarification and rebuttal of the RTNDA filing.
>
> Sincerely,
>
>
> Timothy Karr
> Campaign Director
> Free Press
> www.freepress.net
>
> Diane Farsetta
> Senior Researcher
> Center for Media and Democracy
> www.prwatch.org
>
> ###
>
> The Center for Media and Democracy (www.prwatch.org) is a nonprofit, public
> interest organization that strengthens participatory democracy by
> investigating and exposing public relations spin and propaganda, and by
> promoting media literacy and citizen journalism.
>
> Free Press (www.freepress.net) is a national, nonpartisan organization
> working to reform the media and involve the public in media policymaking.
> Through education, organizing and advocacy, we promote diverse and
> independent media ownership, strong public media, and universal, affordable
> access to communications.

John Stauber, Executive Director, Center for Media and Democracy
520 University Avenue #227, Madison, WI 53703
Phone (608)260-9713 Fax-260-9714 http://www.prwatch.org

# posted by newshare @ 5:23 PM

The Benton Foundation newswire, written by Editor Kevin Tagland, wraps up reports on a study of local TV news in Midwest markets, which found little prime time devoted to election coverage. "The failure of local television news to foster and encourage informed citizen participation in the political process is scandalous," commented Lawrence Hanson, of the Joyce Foundation, which funded the University of Wisconsin study. The National Association of Broadcasters said the study was flawed.

The Associated Press account reported that "an average of 36 seconds per broadcast is all that election coverage has warranted on local evening news in nine top Midwestern markets since Labor Day" and "the five-state analysis by the University of Wisconsin-Madison's NewsLab looked at 30-minute evening news broadcasts on 36 stations. The study also found that TV stations do almost three times as many stories on campaign strategy as on substantive issues. Just 23 percent of the station's election stories were devoted to issues. Studies show that most people rely on TV news reports to get most of their election information, but that they don't learn much from those reports, said Ken Goldstein, a UW-Madison political science professor who directs the NewsLab. Advertising, sports and weather all received more attention than the upcoming November election, the study found. On average, the stations devoted more than 10 minutes to advertising, seven minutes to sports and weather and about 2 1/2 minutes to crime per broadcast. The only stories that got less airtime on average, according to the study, were ones about foreign policy - 23 seconds - and unintentional injury - 11 seconds.

http://hosted.ap.org/dynamic/stories/E/ELECTION_COVERAGE?SITE=MAFIT&SECTION=HOME&TEMPLATE=DEFAULT
* See press release: http://www.joycefdn.org/pdf/MNI-Release.pdf

* See research findings at
http://www.joycefdn.org/pubs/content/pubs-newslab.html

* Election Coverage Panned in NewsLab Study
http://www.broadcastingcable.com/article/CA6380266?display=Breaking+News

* Study: Stations Slacking on Political Coverage
http://www.tvweek.com/news.cms?newsId=10884
(requires free registration)

* NAB Touts Station Election Efforts
On the eve of the release of a study from the University of Wisconsin, Madison, critical of TV station election coverage, the National Association of Broadcasters released its documenting of an anecdotal sample of broadcasters' campaign efforts.
http://www.broadcastingcable.com/article/CA6380374.html?display=Breaking+News

* NAB Blasts UW-Madison Election Coverage "Study"
"It's hard to take seriously a report that purports to document political coverage of local TV stations that ignores
debates, public affairs programs, morning news, noon news, 4 p.m. news, and Saturday and Sunday morning programming. This is a bogus study from a group with a biased agenda."
http://www.nab.org/AM/Template.cfm?Section=News_room&TEMPLATE=/CM/ContentDisplay.cfm&CONTENTID=6981

* What Community Service?
"Roughly half of the local TV news hole not devoted to weather, traffic and sports is devoted to crime and accidents. 30% of morning news shows are devoted to weather and traffic."
http://www.benton.org/benton_files/whatservice.doc

# posted by newshare @ 9:53 PM

Barry Sussman of the Nieman Watchdog site at Harvard University, has posted about the launching of a new resource -- a rotating "blog" which will carry column-like commentaries on media issues by 11 journalism veterans. The first blog, by retired Des Moines Register editorial-page editor Gilbert Cranberg, proposes a movement to amend state corporation laws to allow boards of directors of news organizations to consider not just profitsbut "the journalistic quality of the newspapers and the needs of the communities served by them in making business decisions." Cranberg is co-author of the book: "Taking Stock: Journalism and the Publicly Traded Newspaper Company."

# posted by newshare @ 9:47 PM

STATEMENT SUPPLIED Oct. 9, 2006 BY:
Center for Media and Democracy, Madison, Wis.

HEADLINE: "Issues Full Rebuttal of Claims Made by the Radio-Television
News Directors Association"

"MADISON, Wis. -- The Center for Media and Democracy (CMD) released today a full rebuttal of claims made against its April 2006 report, "Fake TV News: Widespread and undisclosed" (http://www.prwatch.org/fakenews/execsummary ). The report tracked television stations' use of video news releases (VNRs), narrated pre-packaged segments produced by public relations firms for their clients.

"The report documented 77 television stations airing VNRs or related materials; not once did stations disclose the client behind the segment. The report led the U.S. Federal Communications Commission (FCC) to launch an investigation of the 77 stations named, in August 2006.

"Last week, the Radio-Television News Directors Association (RTNDA), through the law and lobby firm Wiley Rein & Fielding, urged the FCC to drop its investigation. RTNDA alleged that the investigation has had "a chilling effect" on TV newsrooms. RTNDA also issued a critique of CMD's report that misrepresented and distorted the substance of the report. CMD's full, point-by-point rebuttal of the RTNDA critique is available online at: http://www.prwatch.org/node/5282 .

"It's unfortunate that an organization representing news directors is attacking accurate, independent reporting," stated CMD senior researcher Diane Farsetta, who co-authored the "Fake TV News" report. "We do not find RTNDA's claims to have any merit. Furthermore, it should be noted that the issue is VNR disclosure. TV stations willing to disclose where the video in their newscast comes from should feel no chill at all. As the FCC stated in its April 2005 Public Notice on VNRs, news audiences have the right to know 'who seeks to influence them.'"

"The RTNDA's latest appeal is a spurious attempt to smother an investigation and undermine the public interest," said Timothy Karr, campaign director for the media reform group Free Press. "The CMD report reveals beyond any doubt that at least 77 stations have violated the letter and the spirit of their broadcast licenses. It's now incumbent upon the FCC to fully investigate all stations that air undisclosed fake news." In conjunction with the release of CMD's report, Free Press launched an activist campaign against fake news. More than 30,000 Americans have written the FCC to support an investigation and penalties for TV stations that broadcast VNRs without FCC-mandated disclosures.

"It was embarrassingly easy to debunk each and every one of RTNDA's critiques," added CMD research consultant Daniel Price, who co-authored the "Fake TV News" report. "No matter how they spin it, every VNR broadcast that we documented is a blatant violation of not only FCC regulations but also RTNDA's own code of ethics, which urges stations to 'clearly disclose the origin of information and label all material provided by corporate or other non-editorial sources.'"

Contact: Diane Farsetta or Daniel Price, CMD, (608) 260-9713
Timothy Karr, Free Press, (201) 533-8838

The Center for Media and Democracy (http://www.prwatch.org ) is a nonprofit, public interest organization that strengthens participatory democracy by investigating and exposing public relations spin and propaganda, and by promoting media literacy and citizen journalism.

# posted by newshare @ 8:17 PM