MPA: newspapers are "alive and well"

Where will Ann Arbor print its legal ads now? (4.00 / 1)

When you have a local daily, the answer is obvious.  When your local daily runs away and joins the circus that is the Internet, where do you publish them?

The flip side is that there are reasons for legal ad requirements ... they help promote government transparency.  If you don't have to pay to publish the ads anywhere, how do people get the information once contained inside?

If I were the city of Ann Arbor, I'd explore whether you could get a change in the law to allow you to publish those ads directly on the city's Web site.

Among the Trees

---

by: Eric B. @ Tue May 12, 2009 at 23:23:07 PM UTC

Publishing to city web site? (0.00 / 0)

That kind of change in the law is precisely what the MPA is opposing.

Me, I'd rather have local newspapers.  But if we can't have newspapers with local content, why should we be forced to spend scarce tax dollars on expensive ads that few people read?

---

by: Kestenbaum @ Tue May 12, 2009 at 23:31:06 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

The MPA is protecting a captive stream of revenue... (4.00 / 1)

It's a very interesting topic.  I'd rather have the ads go into newspapers, too, but you're right ... if the papers have been whittled down to nothing by corporate owners and there is very little local content left, why should local governments be compelled to give those corporations money?

I bet the city of Ann Arbor could make a very convincing argument that allowing it to publish legal ads on its Web site fulfills the intent to inform people of important public notices.  I mean, I don't know anyone associated with the news industry who thinks AnnArbor.com is going to be anything but a big fat bag of fail (same people who helped to ruin other Booth properties, different platform), and I'm assuming the revenue from the legal ads is a big part of the reason why they're doing a print version to distribute to everyone.

Among the Trees

---

by: Eric B. @ Tue May 12, 2009 at 23:51:07 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

In my experience (0.00 / 0)

just about nobody reads the notices. I'm an elected official, I read the newspaper every day, and I never read them.

If you heard a public hearing was going to be held sometime soon that affected you, and also knew that it was being publicized both in the paper and the municipal website, where would you start looking for it? Myself, if I didn't find it online, I'd pick up the phone and call the local clerk, rather than paging through back issues of the paper - if I hadn't recycled them yet.

Yet I'm somewhat conflicted, because I value the role of the local newspaper in a democratic society, and I hate to see anything weaken it further.

---

by: memiller @ Wed May 13, 2009 at 00:29:09 AM UTC

That's true, too... (0.00 / 0)

I don't know how widespread this is, but they started requiring certain zoning changes to be advertised with signs in relevant properties because people weren't reading the notices in the local papers.

Among the Trees

---

by: Eric B. @ Wed May 13, 2009 at 00:40:18 AM UTC

[ Parent ]

From Lisa McGraw... (0.00 / 0)

Ms. McGraw e-mailed and asked that this be included here:

Thank you for your response.  I understand that Ann Arbor is going through a transition but there are still newspapers qualified to inform the public about what their government is doing in the Ann Arbor area.  As you know, the economy in Michigan is tough right now and many businesses are finding new and innovative ways to retool.

I am proud that Michigan is in the forefront of innovation with regard to the newspaper industry.  While many of our members are now available in an online format, I don't think that print newspapers will be eliminated completely.

I'm sorry to hear that you are not  "happy about shelling out taxpayer dollars to publish costly legal notices." I'd be interested in hearing your ideas on how taxpayers can get independent, genuine proof of legitimate notice going out to a community... and also provide a permanent and archivable way of maintaining proof that the law was followed in the posting.

Among the Trees

---

by: Eric B. @ Wed May 13, 2009 at 15:20:35 PM UTC

My reply (4.00 / 2)

(I was just about to post her second letter; thanks for taking care of it.)

I replied as follows:

You are missing my point when you quote only the portion of the sentence that starts with "happy".

I think local newspapers are great, and I have never complained about the cost of putting notices in the Ann Arbor News.

But when local reporters, local writers, and local news disappears from a paper, because your industry has decided those things are outdated frills that can be dispensed with, it's going to be a lot harder to justify devoting scarce tax dollars to display ads that almost no one reads.

Sure, independent proof of legal notice is needed. But the current statutory set-up represents a political decision at the state level that newspapers are to be the only vehicle for that service. When local news disappears, so will the political support for that law.

I'm not sure what you mean when you write that other newspapers are "qualified" to inform the public about local government in this area. The fact is that the skeleton crew left at the News isn't managing to do it now, and cutting their numbers by 75% isn't going to help.

By this time next year, the number of salaried professional journalists whose full time job it is to cover news in Ann Arbor and vicinity will be approximately zero. That's not "innovation" -- that is abandonment.

I'm probably done for now writing inflammatory words on this subject.  The clerks' association lobbyist is arranging to have MPA representatives at the next meeting of our legislative committee.

---

by: Kestenbaum @ Wed May 13, 2009 at 17:06:54 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

Inflammatory? (4.00 / 1)

I don't see the words/phrase "dolt," "moron," or "too stupid to breath" anywhere in anything you've ever written.

On the other hand, it's an entirely legitimate question to ask newspaper companies ... if you're not going to turn yourselves into local shoppers, why are we giving you tax dollars to publish legal ads?

Among the Trees

---

by: Eric B. @ Wed May 13, 2009 at 18:19:16 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

Exactly (0.00 / 0)

This is why we canceled our subscription to the Lansing State Journal. It keeps shrinking in size and in the number of articles, with the local coverage becoming a pathetic trickle. Though there are plenty of AP wire stories for national coverage, news no one who reads the internet needs because those same stories are everywhere.  

---

by: rich @ Wed May 13, 2009 at 21:15:51 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

The Kalamazoo Gazette still has very good local coverage (0.00 / 0)

A reporter shows up at all our township meetings, and there is an article in the next day covering the highlights. The concerts I go to (or sing in - Bach Festival) are reported on by a critic. And they still do honest-to-God investigative journalism, with an article on how the DEQ could not afford to find the cause of TCE contamination in local groundwater affecting part of our township.

I hope they can continue to defy the trend.

---

by: memiller @ Wed May 13, 2009 at 22:37:48 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

Maybe a coincidence (4.00 / 2)

I don't know if it's related, but it seems that the print media is making an effort to prove me wrong.  (I'd be thrilled to be wrong about this, believe me.)

This morning at 11:36 am, I received an email FOIA request from a newspaper reporter for my travel expenses for the last 18 months.

I am delighted to comply, and to see some sign of life in the journalism profession in Michigan.

---

by: Kestenbaum @ Wed May 13, 2009 at 17:19:27 PM UTC

Uh-oh, now you've done it... (0.00 / 0)

Should we create a "Kestenbaum Defense Fund?"

Among the Trees

---

by: Eric B. @ Wed May 13, 2009 at 18:14:04 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

The Pay (for) Less plan (0.00 / 0)

Today's media industry report notes that the MediaNews Group -- the folks who own the Detroit News, or what's left of it -- are planning to start charging by the article.  

Alive and well?  Scrambling seems more like it.

---

by: Harris @ Fri May 15, 2009 at 02:53:42 AM UTC

The good thing is if applied to the News' editorial page, it will become a good deal less relevant (0.00 / 0)

The New York Times already tried this with Times Select, and wound up canceling it.  I mean, I can sympathize that their product is basically being consumed for free right now.  They continue to pay people to go out and report things, and people are sopping it up for free on the Internet, which is an entirely unsustainable business model.

Part of the problem is that the press corps left in existence is a glorified transcription service.  They go out and mindlessly assemble quotes from people of varying opinions and pretend that they've actually done an honest day's work as a journalist.  Ironically, these are often some of the loudest people when it comes to defending the craft of journalism, standing on the backs of the reporters who broke Watergate, the Pentagon Papers, Iran-Contra, and the Kwame Kilpatrick text message scandal while diluting that legacy with sub-par work.

For instance, it is difficult for me to believe that torture that took place in 2002-03 is being laid entirely in Nancy Pelosi's lap.  What a stupid national press corps we have that things have come to this ... someone from the House minority party is suddenly made so prominent in this scandal, allowing focus to shift away from the people who actually authorized it and could have halted it with a simple signature.

It offends me to no end that this country has such little unified moral compass that something as basic as fucking torture is turned into a political football.  Yet, this is the state of things ... a crappy press corps that glosses over crimes against humanity and is deeply offended that no one is giving them money to say as such.

Among the Trees

---

by: Eric B. @ Fri May 15, 2009 at 03:47:20 AM UTC

[ Parent ]