There’s a reason we need a free press, despite its faults and foibles: Democracy won’t work without it.
This column expresses the views of Gene Policinski, senior fellow for the First Amendment, Freedom Forum.He can be reached at gpolicinski@freedomforum.org, or follow him on Twitter at @genefac.
The grand experiment in self-governance that is the United States is rooted in trust and confidence we all will work toward the greater good. But the nation’s founders had experience with a king and his expected benevolence — and what could happen when things didn’t work out.
So, they provided for three branches of government to balance each other, along with periodic elections and the rights for us to assemble and seek change when we think things have gone astray.
All fine, but also relatively long-term solutions. How do we know what our government is doing, how well it is operating or whether our elected officials are up to the job?
Enter the only profession mentioned in the Constitution: A free press, to serve as a “watchdog on government.” A free press the government cannot control, to offer an independent, regular update on behalf of the rest of us.
Let’s stop to acknowledge that many of us are dissatisfied with the free press we have. Survey after survey shows low public trust in our news outlets and in the journalists who staff them.
But in those same Freedom Forum surveys about the First Amendment that began in 1997, the desire for that watchdog role remains high, often supported by a majority of people questioned.
How can these two results co-exist? The answers rest in what kind of press we mean. Much of the highly visible kerfuffle on social sites today concerns national reporting, and more narrowly, the political pundits on cable TV and the tiny percentage of journalists who are the White House press corps.
For most of us, today’s journalism is something different — and much more relevant to us. We see a news media bringing us the day-to-day information we need to live our lives: What local officials are saying, weather forecasts and crime, health and safety reports for our communities. The work of journalists helps us get things done. Reporters ask the questions we would ask if we could be there.
Jurors in Des Moines, Iowa, this week appeared to support the role of journalists as watchdog when they acquitted reporter Andrea Sahouri, who was arrested while covering a Black Lives Matter protest despite her repeated protestations that she was a journalist.
Local journalists, who are the vast majority of the 24,000-plus on the job today, live in the communities on which they report. In just the past month, they have reported on COVID-19 vaccination programs — both the successes and failures by officials we depend upon to keep us safe and fight the pandemic.
Other recent stories told by big and small news operations alike will benefit hundreds of thousands, if not millions of us.
A report on nursing homes in New York state disclosed they may have tested unproven COVID-19 treatments on residents, despite safety warnings, without telling family members. A news partnership in South Carolina found the state has dropped virtually all oversight of local officials’ activities, leading to “questionable or illegal perks of holding public office.” In Mississippi, residents now know a biodiesel plant is accused of illegally dumping hazardous material into public waterways.
Throughout our nation’s history, it has been a free press that has probed, prodded and produced safer food and medicines and helped reveal waste, fraud and abuse of public trust.
Reporters uncover these stories only by poring over records, reviewing court documents and interviewing sources — activities most of us don’t have the time, skill or opportunity to do.
The guarantee that a press is free does not guarantee it will always be good or correct, or that we will like what it presents. But there are more ways than ever to get news and information and to find reports we can trust or verify.
Ironically, the newest source for news and information has helped create some of the greatest threats to a free press in the nation’s history:
The web has decimated financial support for traditional media, and newer media is not yet robust enough to take its place. This results in “news deserts,” where no regular sources of journalism exist.
Misinformation can now spread across the globe in milliseconds, sowing doubt, confusion and mistrust of the reports and motives of a free press.
The free press in any form has been weakened by cuts in staff, with surveys showing the ranks to be less than half of what they were 20 years ago.
Not all the news about a free press is bleak. New financial models are being tested. Collaborations between news organizations and nonpartisan expert collectives have shown results. New attention is focused on regrowing the ranks of local journalism. But more is needed, from increased public support to new revenue sources to regaining the public trust.
On March 16, we celebrate the birthday of James Madison, the principal author of the First Amendment and the rest of the Bill of Rights. He called a free press “one of the great bulwarks of liberty.”
This generation, perhaps unlike any other, is being called on to defend that bulwark and, in the process, protect our liberty.
Named after the late publisher of The Providence Journal, the Hamblett Award is given each year to an individual who has promoted, defended or advocated for the First Amendment throughout his or her career.
The program will be held online. Ticket and registration information can be found here. All proceeds will benefit civics and First Amendment education in New England.
The New England First Amendment Coalition is pleased to announce two additions to its Board of Directors: Judy Meyer, Executive Editor of the Sun Journal, Kennebec Journal and Morning Sentinel; and Lisa Strattan, vice president of News for Gannett New England.
“We are thrilled to have Judy and Lisa join our Board of Directors,” said Justin Silverman, NEFAC’s executive director. “Their experience and expertise will help strengthen our advocacy in Maine and throughout all New England states.”
Editor & Publisher put out their call several months ago for their annual 10 News Publishers That Do It Right contest. Newsrooms had a lot on their plates, being right in the middle of the pandemic, and they were not even certain how many newsrooms would submit to this year’s contest. But they received more than 50 nominations.
The Record-Journal based in Meriden, Connecticut made the list of 10 news publishers that are getting it right.
Like other newsrooms around the country, when the pandemic hit in March 2020, the Record-Journal had to suddenly think of new and innovative ways to conduct business. Like accepting donations from the public through the Local Media Association’s COVID-19 local news fund, raising $21,000 from donations in a two-month period.
Then in May, they received a $99,501 COVID-19 relief grant from Facebook and put it to use immediately bringing back furloughed employees, investing in technology, and providing free marketing for nonprofits like the United Way and others.
In a recent article for Editor & Publisher Gabe Schneider writes about how journalism outlets need new and better social media policies, especially in the wake of the events of 2020.
“But even in the wake of massive protests, even as management at many legacy newspapers committed to better social media policies, and even as journalism has shifted to a mostly online workforce, there’s been a lack of movement in newsrooms to craft a social media policy that allows journalists of color to just do their jobs.”
“The trend line is that reporters, often Black, are punished for their perspective, even if it’s rooted in reporting and facts. Punishment can mean being barred from covering a topic that is close to the reporter’s identity, or an implied threat of being fired.”
The Maynard 200 fellowship provides cutting-edge training and year-long mentorship for leaders, storytellers and media entrepreneurs of diverse backgrounds via the expertise of a distinguished faculty across relevant disciplines. The program supports and emboldens the next generation of leaders, creators and founders of new media ventures.
Candidates can apply for one of three tracks — Storytelling, Advanced Leadership and Media Entrepreneurship.
The program is tuition-free thanks to funding by Google News Initiative, Craig Newmark Philanthropies and The Wunderkinder Foundation. Some travel support will be available for the second training week if it is in person.
The application period opened last year, and the new extended deadline is March 5, 2021.
Fellows are required to attend both training weeks and to participate in the year-long mentorship and supplementary courses.
Once an ad’s graphic design attracts readers’ eyes, it has to say something of value. Otherwise, readers will skip the ad and miss the message completely. Here are a dozen copywriting tips to gain and hold attention:
John Foust has conducted training programs for thousands of newspaper advertising professionals. Many ad departments are using his training videos to save time and get quick results from in-house training. E-mail for information: john@johnfoust.com
1. Don’t try to appeal to everyone. Every large group (newspaper readers, for example) is composed of smaller groups (homeowners, parents, accountants, etc.). When you clearly define a specific target audience, you’ll be able to tailor the advertising to fit their needs.
2. Make the headline sell. According to research, four out of five people don’t read beyond an ad’s headline. This means the headline has to do a lot of the heavy lifting. Its primary purpose is to convince readers to keep reading to learn more about the product being advertised.
3. Give relevant information. Before they make buying decisions, consumers need to know the answers to several key questions: who, what, when, where, why and how much does it cost?
4. Use simple language. Readers lose interest when they encounter complicated terminology or long explanations. When that happens, they turn the page or click the button – and the advertiser loses. It’s best to keep things simple.
5. Say or imply “you.” Readers care more about themselves than about anyone else. That’s human nature. And that’s why the focus should always be on the consumer, not the advertiser. “How you can save on your heating bill” is a better message than “How we cut heating bills.”
6. Use product benefits to appeal to readers’ self-interest. This is a sensible way to keep the focus on “you.” People don’t buy features, they buy benefits. They don’t buy products, they buy what those products can do for them.
7. Don’t exaggerate. Advertisers lose credibility with words like “unbelievable,” “fantastic” and “incredible.” Consumers simply don’t believe that kind of puffery. And they are likely to disbelieve everything else those advertisers say, even if some of those things are true.
8. Don’t make unsubstantiated claims. When advertisers say their products have certain attributes or accomplish certain results, they should support those statements with evidence. That could be in the form of data, examples or testimonials.
9. Limit exclamation marks. One sign of weak writing is the overuse of exclamation marks. If numerous sentences require special punctuation to sound important, it would have been better to use more important words instead. Take a look at national advertising, and you may not see any exclamation marks at all.
10. Don’t criticize the competition. When an advertiser blasts competitors, it looks like sour grapes. Comparisons are much more believable. Some ads even feature charts with point-by-point comparisons of specific features.
11. Create urgency. If you’re running a response ad (as opposed to an image ad), give people a reason to buy immediately. Is inventory limited? Will the offer expire soon?
12. Ask readers to take specific action. What do you want people to do when they finish reading an ad? Stop by the store today? Call for information? Place their orders now? Don’t make them guess. Tell them.
(c) Copyright 2021 by John Foust. All rights reserved.
A reader questions your policy for reporting suicides. A retailer challenges your staff to produce timely and relevant business news. A reporter is confronted for printing a press release charging a candidate with unfair campaign practices without contacting the accused for a response. A family member gets emotional over the publication of an accident photo.
Jim Pumarlo writes, speaks and provides training on community newsroom success strategies. He is author of “Journalism Primer: A Guide to Community News Coverage,” “Votes and Quotes: A Guide to Outstanding Election Coverage” and “Bad News and Good Judgment: A Guide to Reporting on Sensitive Issues in Small-Town Newspapers.” He can be reached at www.pumarlo.com and welcomes comments and questions at jim@pumarlo.com.
These scenarios plus many more are excellent topics for newsroom discussion. Most editors will likely respond directly to the individuals who raise the questions.
But how many newsrooms explain their policies and operations to readers on a regular basis? A column by the editor or publisher should be a fixture if you want to connect with readers.
Fresh off a contentious election season, this is an excellent time to review and identify ways to communicate with readers. Election coverage always prompts questions from readers on everything from candidate announcements to the rollout of press releases to treatment of letters to the editor.
My recommendation: Be on the offense. First, don’ let questions fester. Respond immediately to individual inquiries. Second, communicate with your entire readership. If the question is on the mind of one person, it’s likely piqued the interest of others, too.
Educating readers on a variety of topics should be a priority. What are your guidelines for wedding, engagements and obituaries? Do you publish photos of all proclamations – why or why not? What circumstances warrant publishing the salaries of public officials? Which public records do you regularly monitor and publish?
The lineup of issues is endless.
A newspaper’s role as a government watchdog provides ample opportunities for initiating conversations with readers as well. Why should readers care about changes in a state’s open meeting law? Why does a newspaper demand the names of finalists for key public officials? How does a proposed privacy law threaten the disclosure of information vital to citizens’ everyday lives?
Columns are also a great tool to preview special projects and explain everyday coverage. Newspapers devote a great deal of time and talent reporting on local governing bodies; a column might educate readers why your staff cannot be everywhere and why an advance can be more important than attending a meeting. Crime and courts coverage, by its nature, draws a chorus of detractors; the hows and whys of your process are ready-made content.
Three points are important when detailing newspaper policies and operations:
Have the same person – preferably the editor – communicate policies. It’s OK to acknowledge differences of opinion among staff, but one person should be the liaison to readers. Be certain to share policies with all newspaper employees. Remember those on the front line – the receptionist – who will likely be the first to field a question or complaint. Receptionists should direct inquiries to the appropriate person.
Be open to feedback and criticism. Policies, to be effective, must have a foundation of principles. They also should be subject to review and tweaking, depending on specific circumstances.
Don’t be afraid to accept mistakes or errors in judgment. Saying “we erred” will go a long way toward earning respect and trust from readers.
Talking with individuals inside and outside your newspaper family is an important aspect of developing policies. Connecting with as many people as possible guarantees thorough examination of the various perspectives. The more opinions received, the stronger the policies will be.
Editors and publishers still must make the final decision. But readers will appreciate that policies are not made on a whim.
As climate change concerns take on new urgency, newsrooms have had to adjust by incorporating more coverage of environmental change and its impacts. Unfortunately, many reporters and editors lack the background, sources, and confidence to cover these stories with the depth and nuance they require.
Do you have the sources and understanding of science to uncover these stories? Do you know the most effective and inclusive ways to report on the disproportionate effects of climate change on people of color and vulnerable communities?
The University of Rhode Island’s Metcalf Institute will explore these issues at its 23rd Annual Science Immersion Workshop for Journalists. Metcalf Fellows will gain a solid foundation in the fundamentals of research practice, climate science, and adaptation measures from leading researchers and policymakers to aid their reporting and produce accurate and contextualized reporting on globally relevant environmental issues.
The 2021 Workshop will be conducted virtually due to ongoing public health concerns. Thanks to the generosity of private donors and Metcalf Institute’s endowment, the fellowships include full tuition.
Based on effective methods for remote learning and to accommodate Fellows’ schedules, the workshop will be offered over two weeks: May 24 – 27 and June 7 – 11, 2021 during the afternoons of Eastern Daylight Time.
As a result of participating in the Annual Science Immersion Workshop, Fellows will:
Be able to identify important climate change stories that are relevant to their news audiences.
Recognize and understand the interactions between climate change, the environment, and society, and how climate change disproportionately affects communities of color and low-income communities.
Understand how academic scientists plan, fund, conduct, and publish their research
Be better prepared to understand and communicate scientific uncertainties
Be better prepared to translate scientific findings for news audiences
Applications for the 2021 Annual Science Immersion Workshop for Journalists must be submitted by 11:59 p.m. EST on Sunday, February 14, 2021.
Metcalf Institute strives to create a diverse group of Fellows; journalists of color are strongly encouraged to apply.
About Metcalf Institute Metcalf Institute provides education, training and resources for journalists, researchers, and other science communicators to engage diverse audiences in conversations about science and the environment. Metcalf Institute was established at the University of Rhode Island in 1997 with funding from three media foundations: the Belo Corporation, the Providence Journal Charitable Foundation and the Philip L. Graham Fund, with additional support from the Telaka Foundation.
You Can’t Have Democracy Without A Free Press
There’s a reason we need a free press, despite its faults and foibles: Democracy won’t work without it.
The grand experiment in self-governance that is the United States is rooted in trust and confidence we all will work toward the greater good. But the nation’s founders had experience with a king and his expected benevolence — and what could happen when things didn’t work out.
So, they provided for three branches of government to balance each other, along with periodic elections and the rights for us to assemble and seek change when we think things have gone astray.
All fine, but also relatively long-term solutions. How do we know what our government is doing, how well it is operating or whether our elected officials are up to the job?
Enter the only profession mentioned in the Constitution: A free press, to serve as a “watchdog on government.” A free press the government cannot control, to offer an independent, regular update on behalf of the rest of us.
Let’s stop to acknowledge that many of us are dissatisfied with the free press we have. Survey after survey shows low public trust in our news outlets and in the journalists who staff them.
But in those same Freedom Forum surveys about the First Amendment that began in 1997, the desire for that watchdog role remains high, often supported by a majority of people questioned.
How can these two results co-exist? The answers rest in what kind of press we mean. Much of the highly visible kerfuffle on social sites today concerns national reporting, and more narrowly, the political pundits on cable TV and the tiny percentage of journalists who are the White House press corps.
For most of us, today’s journalism is something different — and much more relevant to us. We see a news media bringing us the day-to-day information we need to live our lives: What local officials are saying, weather forecasts and crime, health and safety reports for our communities. The work of journalists helps us get things done. Reporters ask the questions we would ask if we could be there.
Jurors in Des Moines, Iowa, this week appeared to support the role of journalists as watchdog when they acquitted reporter Andrea Sahouri, who was arrested while covering a Black Lives Matter protest despite her repeated protestations that she was a journalist.
Local journalists, who are the vast majority of the 24,000-plus on the job today, live in the communities on which they report. In just the past month, they have reported on COVID-19 vaccination programs — both the successes and failures by officials we depend upon to keep us safe and fight the pandemic.
Other recent stories told by big and small news operations alike will benefit hundreds of thousands, if not millions of us.
A report on nursing homes in New York state disclosed they may have tested unproven COVID-19 treatments on residents, despite safety warnings, without telling family members. A news partnership in South Carolina found the state has dropped virtually all oversight of local officials’ activities, leading to “questionable or illegal perks of holding public office.” In Mississippi, residents now know a biodiesel plant is accused of illegally dumping hazardous material into public waterways.
Throughout our nation’s history, it has been a free press that has probed, prodded and produced safer food and medicines and helped reveal waste, fraud and abuse of public trust.
Reporters uncover these stories only by poring over records, reviewing court documents and interviewing sources — activities most of us don’t have the time, skill or opportunity to do.
The guarantee that a press is free does not guarantee it will always be good or correct, or that we will like what it presents. But there are more ways than ever to get news and information and to find reports we can trust or verify.
Ironically, the newest source for news and information has helped create some of the greatest threats to a free press in the nation’s history:
Not all the news about a free press is bleak. New financial models are being tested. Collaborations between news organizations and nonpartisan expert collectives have shown results. New attention is focused on regrowing the ranks of local journalism. But more is needed, from increased public support to new revenue sources to regaining the public trust.
On March 16, we celebrate the birthday of James Madison, the principal author of the First Amendment and the rest of the Bill of Rights. He called a free press “one of the great bulwarks of liberty.”
This generation, perhaps unlike any other, is being called on to defend that bulwark and, in the process, protect our liberty.
Please join us in raising our collective voice for transparency and access to public information, and what it means for your readers and community by publishing an editorial during Sunshine Week, March 14-20.