The Critical Need for Aggressive Local News Coverage

In the wake of the the dangerously divisive 2020 Election, the need for improved local news coverage across the country has never been greater.

There has been increased financial pressure on newspapers and digital local news outlets due to a significant drop in advertising revenue over the past couple of years, caused both by the growth of targeted local advertising on Google, Facebook and other major digital outlets and the huge impact on local business advertising during the pandemic.

Consequently, news staff size at most local news outlets around the country have continued a decade long trend of shrinkage to offset those growing revenue losses. The only media that have grown significantly are the national media outlets, particularly those covering the political scene. While local newspapers have lost thousands of reporters this year, The New York Times and Washington Post have added hundreds of journalists each over past few years in order to keep up with the growing demand for national news.

These developments not have come at a worse time. Because national news has taken center stage over the past five years, news consumption habits have moved with that trend. Interest in national news, particularly the Trump phenomenon, has dominated the news consumption time of Americans since 2015, masking the impact of decreased local coverage in most small and middle-sized cities and towns. Even national news broadcasts have cut back on their coverage from anywhere else but Washington. The three leading cable news networks have moved almost exclusively to coverage of Washington and the White House.

All of this ignored an important fact that has likely contributed to the polarization of the voting public. The growing national news ecosystem has become representative of and actually fueled the polarization of the country’s politics. People have gravitated to “friendly” sources to help them deal with the increasingly bitter divide. Nationally, readers on the left side of the political debate have gravitated toward the “mainstream” and more traditional media sources, like the national broadcast news networks and CNN and MSNBC, which represent the media establishment, one that has been characterized as liberal by the growing new right-wing media outlets, primarily Fox News but including fledgling One America News (OAN) and NewsMax. Those three networks serve the right-wing news consumers of the nation with an increasing diet of conspiracy theories supported by the existing president of the United States and his supporters.

And the one force that could have helped mitigate this growing national divide is local news. Local news outlets are closer to their consumers. They cover issues that are close to home, and build their trust because of that. Good local news outlets are watchdogs for their local communities and develop relationships with their viewers and readers because of that. They generally do not depend upon a political leaning to draw in their customers, but are valued because they help people live their lives in their communities.

So at a time when we most need trusted local news outlets that can help their audiences sort out the wreckage of our bitterly divided national political scene, the local news media is struggling to stay alive.

One of the most important challenges the Biden administration will face will be that of supporting a free press that supports free speech and helps bring the nation together, one community at a time, to deal with common problems and differences.

That bond local media outlets have with their audiences has suffered in recent years because they have had to cut back on that coverage. That became more obvious in 2020 as the Coronavirus spread throughout the country, and many local news operations were ill-equipped to cover their state and local governments and their responses to the virus, which were even more critical at a time when the national government was passing along responsibility to deal with the virus to those local governments and agencies.

While many local newspapers, TV News operations and Digital Media outlets have risen to the challenge and covered state and local responses well, many more have lacked the resources to provide value added.

One only has to go to the website Ground.news to understand the dangers of having a national electorate that is so divided that they can’t even decide what the facts are. They are presented enthusiastic views of opposing “Truths.”

Ground.News shows where news stories are covered, and the stunning reality is that a huge number of stories appear in media serving only one side of the political spectrum.

On this day, for example, here are examples of stories read predominantly by only one side of the debate.

1. “Trump ‘just plain wrong’ on fraud claims: Georgia Secretary of State Raggensperger. That story was published by virtually all of the media identified as “left” or “left-leaning” and by virtually none of media identified as “right” or “right-leaning.”
2. Portland Mayor blames “antifa anarchists” following NYE riot. That story was published virtually all of the media outlets on the right, and virtually none of those on the left.
3. Durbin: Trump Georgia call ‘merits nothing less than a criminal investigation’. This story appeared in many left-leaning media outlets and not one right wing media outlet.
4. Joe Biden Team Blocks Reporters from “chatting” during Virtual Press Confernces. No left-leaning media ran that story. All of the right-wing outlets did.

The message is simple. We have created alternate realities that fuel our divided country.

In this paragraph from a terrific column from the Columbia Journalism Review column called “The Media Today”, author Lauren Harris points out how local news outlets did, or did not, help their readers better understand the thinking behind the group of senators intending to vote against certifying Biden’s victory:

Of the largest newspapers representing states represented by senators who will vote against certifying Biden’s win, some succeeded in providing crucial context; others failed. On the plus side, the Baton Rouge Advocate wrote on a Saturday that “Louisiana Republican U.S. Sen. John Kennedy said Saturday he would join an effort to refuse certifying electors from six states, in hopes of denying the presidency to the election’s winner, Joe Biden.” The Milwaukee Journal Sentinel led with a similar note about Senator Ron Johnson’s participation in the effort “despite no evidence of widespread voter fraud.” But as of Sunday night, the Knoxville News Sentinel, the largest paper in Tennessee, had published nothing about Marsha Blackburn’s or Bill Hagerty’s decision to vote against certification of Biden’s win. The Indianapolis Star, writing about Senator Mike Braun, called claims of voter fraud “false or unverified,” but not until the fifth paragraph of the story. The Oklahoman (home to Sen. James Lankford) dipped its toe into both-sides-ism, including Lankford’s own statements before quoting an opponent who called them “gibberish.” The editorial boards of the Billings Gazette (Steve Daines) and the Kansas City Star (Josh Hawley) convened to condemn the motions of their state senators as “extreme, unjustified,” and “desperate — and dangerous,” respectively.

We need a concerted effort from the federal government to support strong media coverage and a strong media watchdog effort. Historically the government has played a role to support a free press and fair coverage (The Fairness Doctrine that covered broadcast television comes to mind). Because of the creation of the internet and social media, it’s time for the government to step up again and encourage free, fair and honest coverage again, this time on all media platforms.

Let’s start with strengthening local news.