TO: Brian Tierney
FROM: A Reader
RE: Owning Newspapers
Dear Brian,
And so, you’ve gone and done it: You’ve bought a newspaper. Two newspapers, in fact.
My newspapers.
Part of me wants to cheer. When I hear you speak of The Philadelphia Inquirer and Daily News as a “civic trust,” I want to applaud. When I hear you talk about a long-term commitment to building a successful business on the back of quality journalism, I say right-on. When I read of your investors’ pledge to preserve the independence of the newsrooms, I am deeply impressed that you even thought to take such a step.
So part of me says, “Way to go, Brian.” Congratulations on your decision to invest some of your money — and, no doubt, a good piece of yourself — in preserving one of the most precious and essential contributors to our American way of life. I invested almost 20 years in The Inquirer and its work, and they were among the most worthwhile years of my life.
Then there’s the part of me that wants to pray. And pray. And pray.
To be honest, I’ve been praying for the future of newspapers for some time. Why? Well, on the day your purchase of my newspapers was announced, I was participating in a two-day conference at The Poynter Institute on “The Future of News.” For roughly 48 hours, about 30 print and online editors, publishers and other news executives wrestled with how to preserve — and improve — our journalism in an age when new forms of media are scattering newspaper audiences and threatening the economic underpinnings of newsrooms like the ones you just bought.
One publisher, in a moment of nostalgia, smiled as he thought back over his 30-plus years in the business and recalled how easy it used to be. But no more. Paid circulation is declining, classified advertising is shifting to free web sites, department stores are consolidating, gasoline for the delivery trucks is $3 a gallon, newsprint costs are rising. On and on.
At a time when the journalism has never been more important, Brian, the business has never been tougher.
At least as private owners, you and your partners have more ability to withstand the short-term profit pressures that made life for the people at The Inquirer and Daily News an ongoing exercise in re-budgeting — usually downward. At a time when significant investment in new media is crucial, if we are to publish our work on the ever-growing variety of platforms our audiences demand, your investors might give you enough flexibility to commit to a long-term vision of the future.
(That’s not to overlook the fact that you have financial obligations, too, don’t you? And banks, like Wall Street investors, have this thing about being paid.)
And if the business weren’t enough of a challenge, your group, Philadelphia Media Holdings, has this additional issue of being who you are: local, well-known businessmen, invested in businesses and involved in causes the newspapers regularly cover. Clearly, you’re aware of the concerns raised by your situation — you addressed it repeatedly in every meeting and press briefing you held on Tuesday.
But here’s a sobering thought, Brian: You and your newspapers will find yourselves addressing those concerns for as long as you own The Inquirer and Daily News. Why? Because perhaps more than ever before, the public ascribes motives to every story they read — or don’t read — in the newspaper.
Remember when you and I met during my years as spokesperson for Independence Blue Cross? We listened as the people we worked for — people for whom I have tremendous respect and admiration — speculated daily about why coverage of the company was, in their eyes, so negative. Sometimes they suspected a bias against health insurers; some days they blamed a personal dislike for our CEO; some days they said reporters were more interested in selling papers than telling the truth.
(I tried to convince them that publishers wished their newsrooms were interested in selling papers, but that’s another story…)
The point is, we in your audience are ready and willing to make assumptions about why the paper covers the news in the way it does — and why it doesn’t cover stories we think it should. I’d venture a guess that you’ve made a fair number of those assumptions yourself over the years. And we’ll seize everything we know about you — as well as what we don’t know about you — to make our case.
So what can you do about that?
Assuming that you and all of your partners do not plan to divest yourselves of all business interests outside the newspapers, a commitment to real transparency can help; you should willingly provide information about your business investments, political affiliations, board memberships. As stewards of a business that believes in — and thrives on — full disclosure, why not fully disclose? This is about credibility — not just the credibility of you and your fellow investors, but the credibility of two institutions whose existence ultimately will depend on whether the public believes them.
On whether the public believes you.
In your appearances on Tuesday, Brian, you talked about your intention to tell those who come to you with complaints about the papers to call the publisher. That, too, is a good instinct — though I’d suggest they call the editor, who’s responsible for the paper’s coverage. In any event, this question points to how important it will be to design your new company’s reporting structure in a way that demonstrates that the newsrooms truly are independent.
And consider seizing every chance you get, Brian — publicly and privately — to support the work of the journalists you now employ. I’ve worked with many of them, and you are truly blessed to have them on your payroll. In Wednesday’s papers, a lot of them said they will be watching their new bosses carefully — and I know from experience how true that is. I also know that they care deeply about their journalism, that they believe their work can make this community a better place to live, and that given the least reason to believe that ownership shares their passion, they will run through walls for the papers they love.
All of this will be difficult, Brian. That’s why part of me is praying so hard.
Most of all, Brian, I write to you today as a resident of the Philadelphia region — a resident who believes that more than ever before, our community needs independent, aggressive, fair and committed journalists to work on my behalf. Life in 2006 is so complicated, so confusing; I may have access to more information from more sources than ever, but that in itself has simply added to the confusion. I need the journalists of The Inquirer and Daily News to help me make sense of it all.
Do we need journalists who are civic cheerleaders? No. Do we need newspapers that we think of as friends? No. What we need is journalism that we can count on to provide the understanding I need in order to participate actively in the decisions that affect my life and the lives of my neighbors.
We need journalism that watches out for my interests, helps me understand how I fit into this rapidly changing world, surprises me, makes me laugh and makes me cry.
We need journalism that reminds me that more and more, I am part of a global community – in other words, we need a metropolitan news report that is befitting of one of the world’s great metropolitan centers.
You’ve enjoyed great success over the years, Brian, representing the interests of some of this region’s most powerful — and demanding — people and institutions. Now you get to represent me.
And I say my 50 cents makes me the most important client you’ve ever had.
Good luck.
Butch
