Newspaper ownership and conservative dominance of op-ed pages

by Shai Sachs, Fri Oct 12, 2007 at 11:22:19 AM EDT

A couple of weeks ago, I commented on the Media Matters report on conservative dominance of newspaper op-ed pages.  At the time, I wrote that it could be possible for a liberal entrepreneur to establish an op-ed syndicate for progressive writers which competes with the titans of the opinion industry - Washington Post Writers Group, Tribune Media Service, and Creators Syndicate.  A progressive opinion syndicate could succeed by offering fresh and diverse voices, integrating social web technology with its offerings, tapping the variety of the blogosphere to package localized and national voices, and offering competitive prices.

At the heart of the Media Matters report, and crucial to establishing the viability of a liberal opinion syndicate, is the question of why conservatives dominate op-ed pages.  There are a few competing theories.  One theory holds that conservative dominance reflects the bias of newspaper owners; another theory suggests that a broad but right-leaning section of the population, like advertisers, newspaper subscribers, or conservative movement activists, pressures the papers to publish conservative writers; another suggests that the large syndicates, who distribute most of the large opinion columns, offer preferential treatment to conservatives.  Perhaps the most nuanced explanation I've seen was in the comment threads, where carter1 offered a three-part explanation which encompasses a number of different trends.

I recently found a very interesting resource which might help evaluate some of these theories (h/t to John Palfrey at the Berkman Center.)  The Center for Public Integrity maintains an online website which cross-references media ownership records with campaign finance records, called MediaTracker.  By typing in your zip code or city and state in the search form on the front page, you can discover which companies own the media in area - including TV, radio, cable, broadband and newspapers.  What's more, those companies are cross-referenced with campaign finance records, to give us some idea of the ideological bias of the media owners.  For example, here's the political influence of Clear Channel - unsurprisingly, employees and PACs of the company contribute much more to Republicans than to Democrats (nearly 70% to Republicans, and 30% to Democrats).  Unfortunately, neither Media Matters nor MediaTracker expose their raw data, so it's difficult to evaluate, in a systematic way, whether or not conservative ownership is correlated with conservative opinion pages.  Still, it's possible to get a snapshot of some media markets.

Regardless of the cause of conservative bias in op-ed pages, I'm still curious about, the possibility of establishing a progressive op-ed syndicate.  Such a syndicate could do a great deal to strengthen the progressive movement.  With the density of national, regional, and local progressive blogs, it should be easy to find writers who can be syndicated, and to market those voices to newspapers.  That kind of business model would not only help distribute liberal opinions into new and larger markets, it would also help sustain some progressive blogs.  Furthermore, it would require relatively little start-up capital, and it's something which an enterprising progressive could (it seems) easily get off the ground.

This idea is hardly earth-shattering; in fact, it's more or less obvious, and I'm a bit surprised that a blog-based op-ed syndicate doesn't exist.  That makes me wonder whether there's an obvious reason why such a business might fail, or whether it's simply never been tried.  Could a progressive opinion syndicate be a viable business?  What are some of the potential roadblocks, and how could they be overcome?  Is this a disastrous idea that could never fly?  Please share your thoughts in the comments!

Tags: liberal entrepreneurship, Media, Media Matters, Media Tracker, newspapers, op-ed, syndication industry (all tags)

  • 5 Comments
  • 0 recs
  • Share
  • Permalink

Comments

5 Comments

Shadow_head_small
Re: Newspaper ownership

I've been professionally involved in the newspaper industry for over 25 years.  Newspapers have always had a conservative bent for the simple reason that those who own the papers need to be very wealthy, and those that run newspapers make a disproportional amount more money than your typical reporter or production person.

A small town newspaper, in a community of around 25,000, can cost an investor between one and three million dollars to own.  Newspapers go for between one and three times revenue and up to 15 times profit.  So a small paper that brings in $200,000 in profits for its owners could cost someone $3 million to buy (based on certain variables, of course).

The "myth" of the liberal media derives from the fact that a majority of journalists are liberal -- meaning, I suppose, that it isn't a myth -- until you realize that those who are columnists, or anchors (crossing over to the electronic media) or editors or talk show hosts make a ton more money than the typical reporter. Therefore, the "myth" of a conservative bias is equally true.

The Op-Ed pages are edited by the elite of all newspapers: editors who are the best paid, or the owner themselves if it is a small town newspaper.  OP-Ed pages will always reflect the class of people who edit them -- and its easy to see that they are not going to be people who support a progressive income tax, or environmentalism, etc.

A liberal syndication service could not work for the same reason that Air America is a hopeless cause: who will use it or hire it?  The same people who would decide to endorse GWB are also the decision-maker for what syndication services to use.

The traditional syndication services are run purely on a profit motive: if a writer is popular they get printed.  Popular with the readers? No.  Popular with the people who buy syndication.

by PageUp 2007-10-12 11:54AM | 0 recs
Shadow_head_small
Re: Newspaper ownership

One last point: people always talk about the political bent of the media without comparing it to the rest of the business world.

For instance, would it surprise you that the executive officers of Wal-Mart might be more conservative than the people who stock the shelves?  Then the fact that the people who write news stories are more liberal than those who write columns and editorials shouldn't surprise you.

Therefore, if you are a liberal candidate for office, your best bet is to get to know that local reporter.  If you are a conservative candidate, call the publisher.

by PageUp 2007-10-12 12:01PM | 0 recs
Shadow_head_small
Re: Newspaper ownership

Thanks for your perspective!  You paint a fairly dark picture of the op-ed landscape, and bias in media generally.  Still, I wonder - do you think it's possible to improve the situation at the margins?  Say, to increase representation of progressives in op-ed columns by 5% or so?  Moreover, isn't it possible for a group of strategic and well-heeled progressive investors to restore some balance to the picture by snapping up newspapers as they go on the block?  One thing I've noticed in newspaper purchases of the last couple of years - wealthy liberals seem to be very late to the party.

by Shai Sachs 2007-10-13 04:12AM | 0 recs
Shadow_head_small
Re: Newspaper ownership and conservative dominance

The way my local daily behaves makes me think of one thing that might work:

They will publish just about anything if it's free. This benefits the big rightie think tanks like Heritage and AEI and smaller ones as well. Leftie think tanks are showing up less frequency but I guessing they might not be making as much content available.

I've pressed the op-editorship on disclosures for who funds the "free" columns, but to no avail. Still, they make an effort at balance, and if more progressive material was subsidized for them, it might well see print.

by mzepezauer 2007-10-13 07:42AM | 0 recs
Shadow_head_small
One Example: PeaceVoice

Long ago (1960s-70s), there was something called Liberation News Service (LNS) that tried to do what Associated Press and United Press International did. I guess LNS doesn't exist anymore.

Now, there is PeaceVoice, a project of the Oregon Peace Institute
http://abstracts.peacevoice.info/. As the director, Tom Hastings, said in an email to the Peace and Justice Studies Association (PJSA):

Tired of the war media ruling our public discourse? Let's show them that the intellectuals aren't all in service to empire; we in PJSA can produce a public peace presence via our ability to analyze and evaluate current events in the long timeline of history and in the light of the theories in our field. The public has common sense; let's give them the intellectual ammunition they desire to make the right choices.

Write a commentary piece with a peace analysis and send it to this address. We at PeaceVoice will try to place it in a mainstream media outlet for you. There is never a charge to you or to the editors; we are funded by an Oregon family foundation who wants to see this succeed. We've placed pieces for some of you and sometimes it takes time (Joseph Fahey just had one placed that he sent us five MONTHS ago!).

Our influence is small and sometimes small is all it takes to make the difference in our democracy. We learned that painfully in 2000 and 2004; let's change this national conversation about peace and justice, beginning with you.

The pieces 400-600 words stand the best chance of placement, but longer ones are sometimes taken too.

My article on the effectiveness of nonviolent action (compared to military action) was/will be published in two small newspapers.

by RandomNonviolence 2007-10-13 08:37AM | 0 recs

Diaries

Advertise Blogads


----------- myDD - skin -----------