Who’s Watching the Richmond Media? Community Weeklies Diverge on News Council Idea Tuesday, September 12, 2006
Posted by Conaway B. Haskins III in Uncategorized.trackback
Part I of a Two-Part Series
Greg Pearson does not particularly care for the Richmond Times-Dispatch or NBC-12. Actually, Pearson is not a big fan of Media General or many of the corporate media conglomerates. The publisher and editor of the Chesterfield Observer, one of two community newsweeklies covering Virginia’s fourth-largest locality, Pearson believes that local news issues suffer a lack of coverage by such large media corporations. As a response, Person regularly uses his editorials and his “Media Watch” column to chastise the larger news outlets for what he considers to be shabby treatment of Chesterfield news.
In Pearson’s mind, the situation with Media General is drastic enough to mandate an institutional response. For quite some time, he has been beating the drums for the creation of an outside intermediary organization to serve as a watchdog for fairness and accuracy in coverage, especially of news in his hometown. Called a “news council,” this group would field complaints, conduct investigation and serve as a sounding board for citizen, business, and government criticism of the local press. According to Pearson, “the news council idea is not an original one. I first inquired about it in 1997 when I heard about it and contacted the Minnesota News Council. I spoke with Gary Gilson (the Minnesota group’s executive director) who said it would be announced what markets are given a grant [by the Knight Foundation] to get a news council started.”
What Pearson is referring to is the Knight Foundation, a national grant-making institution founded by the men who started what the Knight-Ridder media empire. In June, Knight awarded two $75,000 grants to emerging news councils in Southern California and New England to assist with start-up costs. According to a Knight press release, “News councils are independent, nonprofit organizations that promote trusted journalism by investigating accuracy and fairness complaints against news outlets. They help determine the facts involved in these disputes, and provide open forums where citizens and journalists can discuss media ethics, standards and performance.”
READ MORE
I wholeheartedly agree with Pearson’s idea of having an oversight panel for all news outlets. I have thought this way. Why? Because the news is (or rather should be) a public service – to warn people of possible dangers. The news is not entertainment and it is not art.
On a more light-hearted note: I do not share Pearson’s opinion of the Richmond Times-Dispatch. I am a voracious reader so I feel qualified enough to say that the RT-D is about as perfect as any newspaper can hope to be. It doesn’t hold anything back; that’s what I like about it.
Now, Channel 12 News…they are a different story. That bunch is not at all a straight-shooting team. They seem to be mostly concerned with making folks feel fuzzy and warm. I like the truth (and I know where to find it).
So yes, please, have an oversight committee that can ensure outlets touting themselves as “news” are about that and only that.
I must disagree with the idea that news media should be controlled by an oversight committee, though I see no problem with one that simply acts an arbitrator as has been operating in California.
Seems to me that journalism is protected from government control because the Founding Fathers believe the marketplace – yes, the same marketplace that gives us Us Weekly and InStyle magazines – is what should decide is newsworthy, not some council of elders pulling on their beards.
It also seems to me that journalism is a very unusual business – as another poster observed, it isn’t like making toaster ovens. Its role is so important that the marketplace should hold it to a higher standard than it does typical widget-makers. Its ideals should be openness, free expression of ideas and inclusiveness. When it fails those ideals, it should be indicted by the court of public opinion, not by a court or a star chamber.
[...] Regarding the News Council blog, my differences with the Richmond Times-Dispatch, WWBT or any other daily media does not concern their size. The issue is simply accurate and fair reporting. All of the media, regardless of size, need to be monitored, including the Chesterfield Observer. A News Council concept would allow a citizen, business, government, or group to access a venue for redressing poor reporting wherever it occurs locally. Saying “Pearson is not a big fan of Media General or many media conglomerates” is not really correct. There is a need for big media. Most of the good reporting done in the Richmond metro is written by RTD reporters. To cover some stories, you have to have the resources, and that means adequate staffing. Six months ago, I said so at an RTD public forum. [...]