While the death of newspapers is no longer news, the social impact of their loss has not been replaced by online news sources (bogus and reliable) or even by local TV and radio stations. Few papers anymore can afford multiple investigations taking weeks or months of research and vetting by fact-checkers, and few papers can now afford lawyers to handle the potential lawsuits brought by unhappy subjects of investigative journalism. While a few newspapers have been able sustain themselves—such as The New York Times, Washington Post, and Los Angeles Times—the achievement has come by positioning themselves as nation or even international newspapers, not local papers reporting local millage issues.
Ghosting the News is an account by veteran reporter and editor Margaret Sullivan on what is happening at the civic level as a result of more and larger “news deserts”—places without access to local, legitimate news: “[D]ay-in-and-day-out local reporting . . . makes secretive town officials unhappy because of what they can’t get away with, and lets local taxpayers know how their money is being spent.” A study conducted in 2019 by PEN America (an organization devoted to literature and human rights) found that “As local journalism declines, government officials conduct themselves with less integrity, efficiency, and effectiveness, and corporate malfeasance goes unchecked. With the loss of local new, citizens are less likely to vote, less politically informed, and less likely to run for office.”
Furthermore, Sullivan reports, “Studies in Japan and Switzerland have found much the same dynamic: In places where news breaks down, so does citizenship; where newspaper market share increases, so does political accountability.” In short, a lack of reliable news sources results in “less civic engagement, more political polarization, more potential for government corruption.”
So, what is to be done? Sullivan offers examples of what is currently working, and what might be necessary to ensure that issues of local importance are reported and made widely available. The first example, and hardest to find, requires being bought by a benevolent billionaire, as happened to the LA Times and Washington Post, whose owners to date have kept their hands off editorial decisions. The other, more tenuous example is the non-profit route, in which papers change from a for-profit format (because the advertiser revenues are no longer there) supported by subscribers and deep-pocket donors. The third possibility, which among American journalists is looked upon with deep skepticism, is government subsidy.