The Decline of Local News
A Federal Communications Commission (FCC) report released earlier this month says that local news in the U.S. is in serious decline. The report, titled "Information Needs of Communities: The Changing Media Landscape in a Broadband Age," suggests changes to the media’s business model have resulted in quantity being valued over quality of news coverage. According to the FCC, this has resulted in a shortage of local accountability reporting, leaving gaps in the information that the public receives, and making it easier for corruption to take root.
THE MARK: Can you tell us a bit about FCC's findings?
STEVE WALDMAN: The top-level finding is that many parts of the media landscape are very healthy, robust, and dynamic, but that there are a couple of areas that have serious problems – most notably, what we call the shortage of local accountability reporting, which is full-time reporting covering city hall, the school board, the statehouse, and the basic functions of local government and life.
THE MARK: What do you think are the primary causes of the shortage of local news?
WALDMAN: The media's business model has changed dramatically as a result of new technology. People have been able to get more and more of their news online, and advertisers are shifting their money away from newspapers (and other traditional local media), and toward the internet. So the revenue source for most newspapers has dropped dramatically, and the result is that a lot of reporters have been laid off.
When you talk to reporters about what they no longer cover, it tends to be investigative or enterprise-type stories. When they have less time, they are more reactive, and are more likely to work on quick stories that might be generated from press releases, or to focus on storylines that are generated by city hall or other institutions.
None of this would matter, particularly, if the web-based news organizations were filling the reporting gap. However, what we found was that the web-based news services do many things really well – there are more outlets, there are more voices, and there's more aggregation of more news sources from many different places – but they don't tend to generate enough revenue to support a staff of local reporters. The one gap that the new media have not filled is this costly, labour-intensive, full-time reporting at the local level.
THE MARK: How does a shortage of local news affect communities?
WALDMAN: It leads to a lack of accountability among powerful institutions. When you have less coverage of city hall, you're more likely to have corruption, or wasted tax dollars, or decisions being made without sufficient public input.
THE MARK: Did you encounter any communities that had diverse and good-quality local news? If so, what were they doing right?
WALDMAN: The healthiest communities seem to be the ones where different players are picking up pieces of the puzzle. The best combination tends to be when commercial and non-profit media work side-by-side in the same community. It can work well, but it often requires the non-profit entities to be pretty well funded.
Hyper-local coverage, now, is probably better than it's ever been, because even in the fattest, happiest days of newspapers and TV stations, the media were never able to get granular – down to a block-by-block level. Now, you have these new organizations – often volunteer-oriented – that are able to provide a level of information that a traditional newspaper never could. The technology has allowed for a much richer experience than the traditional Community Weekly.
There are a lot of bright spots, and if we can preserve – and not screw up – the innovation that's taking place all over the media landscape, while addressing what I think is a very serious gap, we'll have a very good situation.
THE MARK: Do you think that, with the globalization of news, aspiring journalists are less likely to be interested in local beats?
WALDMAN: This is very anecdotal, but I've heard tales of young journalists really wanting to dive into their communities – they’re seeing the gap and wanting to come up with new ways to fix it. So I don't think there's a lack of energy or desire around it. It's more a matter of whether or not there are going to be enough paying jobs so that they can make careers out of it.
I think, if the business models evolve, there's going to be no shortage of people who want to do the work. That's the critical moment we're in right now. Hopefully these models, whether they're for-profit or non-profit, are going to evolve quickly enough that we won’t have this lost generation of people who really want to do great reporting, but have no opportunity.
THE MARK: Have you found that investigative journalism is losing out to entertainment or sensationalism?
WALDMAN: On a national level, there's certainly more sensationalism, but there's also more substance. There's just more of everything. I think it's too early to tell whether or not sensationalism will end up crowding out the muckraking.
And, again, part of the equation will be the non-profit sector. Part of why it appears that, on the national level, there has not been a big drop-off in investigative reporting, is the creation of ProPublica, and organizations like that, which have picked up some of the slack. That's worked well – but it depends on these new institutions growing and continuing to have a real impact.
