Debate Digest: Teacher-student friendships on Facebook, Law school, Balanced budget amendment, US debt ceiling deal.
Debate: Should governments bailout journalism?
From Debatepedia
(Difference between revisions)
Revision as of 23:15, 3 May 2009 (edit) Brooks Lindsay (Talk | contribs) (→Con) ← Previous diff |
Current revision (15:39, 27 October 2010) (edit) Omega Venom2 (Talk | contribs) (→Background and context) |
||
Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
- | {|style="font-size:100%; border:1px solid #BAC5FD; " cellpadding="0" | ||
- | |||
- | |colspan="2" width="45%" bgcolor="#F2F2F2" style=""| | ||
- | === Should governments subsidize journalism, particularly as the industry struggles to survive? === | ||
- | |} | ||
- | |||
- | {| style="width:100%; height:100px" border="0" align="center" | ||
- | |__TOC__ | ||
- | |} | ||
- | |||
{|style="font-size:100%; padding:.4em;padding-top:0.5em;" cellpadding="5" | {|style="font-size:100%; padding:.4em;padding-top:0.5em;" cellpadding="5" | ||
|- | |- | ||
|bgcolor="#F7F7F7" colspan="2" style= "border:1px solid #BAC5FD"| | |bgcolor="#F7F7F7" colspan="2" style= "border:1px solid #BAC5FD"| | ||
- | ===Background and Context of Debate:=== | + | ===Background and context=== |
- | Sen. Benjamin Cardin, D-Md. proposed legislation in March that would allow newspapers to operate as tax-exempt nonprofits as long as they don't endorse political candidates. | + | [[Image:Newspapers.jpg|right|120px]][[Image:United States Capital.jpg|left|180px]]In 2008 and 2009, journalism entered what many called a crisis in its existence, with many newspapers and media companies failing to become profitable in the wake on significant shifts to online content and online advertising, in the face of rising competition from classifieds services such as Ebay and Craigslist, and in the face of the 2009 and 2009 financial crisis.[[Image:United States With many major newspapers closing down, such as the Seattle PI and Rocky Mountain News, media companies declaring bankruptcy, The Tribune Company (which owns many of US newspapers) - including the Los Angeles Times - filing for bankruptcy protection in December of 2008, and with significant government bailouts going to the banking and automobile manufacturing industry, many began calling for a "bailout" or government subsidization for the journalism industry. |
- | Nichols and Robert McChesney suggested in an April 6 cover piece in The Nation that the government eliminate postal fees for smaller papers and periodicals and offer tax credits for newspaper subscriptions to help save the media.[http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2009/04/16/obama-appointee-suggests-radical-plan-newspaper-bailout/] | ||
- | Looking for more direct assistance, the company that owns two Philadelphia papers approached Pennsylvania Gov. Ed Rendell in January seeking a $10 million bailout to help cover its massive debts -- and it's not the only conglomerate that's hurting. | + | ariety of proposals have been presented for how the government might "bailout" the journalism industry. Some have suggested a direct lump sum gift to specific companies, amounting, some suggest, to between 5 and 10 billion dollars. Others suggest a tax exemption of various kinds for newspapers, or the elimination of postal fees. Another proposal includes offering credits of around $200 to all citizens to be used to subscribe to any news publication they choose. There is much debate about these approaches, covered below in this pro/con article. |
- | The Tribune Company, which owns many of the nation's leading papers, including the Los Angeles Times, filed for bankruptcy protection in December. Many more newspapers have closed their doors, like the Rocky Mountain News, or have ended their print editions, like the Seattle Post-Intelligencer. | ||
- | Let's eliminate postal rates for periodicals that garner less than 20 percent of their revenues from advertising. | + | |} |
+ | {| style="width:100%; height:100px" border="0" align="center" | ||
+ | |__TOC__ | ||
|} | |} | ||
Line 44: | Line 34: | ||
====Con==== | ====Con==== | ||
- | *'''Society would be better off with creative destruction in journalism.''' [http://news.cnet.com/8301-13578_3-9787518-38.html Declan McCullagh. "Should you be taxed to subsidize 'The New York Times'?". CNET. September 28, 2007] - "probably the biggest reason to be wary of higher taxes to help out newspapers is the broader one: Bailing out an industry that's suffering because of technological change or increased competition is not a wise choice in the long run. Afternoon newspapers are largely a defunct breed for the obvious reasons; would society really be better off if taxes were raised to subsidize such money-losing ventures for purposes of nostalgia?" | + | *'''[[Argument: Creative destruction in journalism would be good for society| Creative destruction in journalism would be good for society]]''' [http://news.cnet.com/8301-13578_3-9787518-38.html Declan McCullagh. "Should you be taxed to subsidize 'The New York Times'?". CNET. September 28, 2007] - "probably the biggest reason to be wary of higher taxes to help out newspapers is the broader one: Bailing out an industry that's suffering because of technological change or increased competition is not a wise choice in the long run. Afternoon newspapers are largely a defunct breed for the obvious reasons; would society really be better off if taxes were raised to subsidize such money-losing ventures for purposes of nostalgia?" |
Line 64: | Line 54: | ||
====Con==== | ====Con==== | ||
- | *'''Journalism is not dying, it is more alive and open than ever.''' [http://www.inquisitr.com/14118/journalist-calls-for-government-assistancefor-journalists/ Duncan Riley. "Journalist Calls For Government Assistance…For Journalists". The Inquisitr. January 2, 2009] - "The argument that journalism is dying has already been disproved many times before. It is the last argument of those unable to adapt to the new reality of publishing news. Quite the opposite, journalism, in its many forms is the strongest it has ever been in the history of man kind. No longer is the written word the exclusive domain of an elite few, and guided by media proprietors with set agendas." | + | *'''[[Argument: Journalism is not dying, it is more alive than ever| Journalism is not dying, it is more alive than ever]]''' [http://www.inquisitr.com/14118/journalist-calls-for-government-assistancefor-journalists/ Duncan Riley. "Journalist Calls For Government Assistance…For Journalists". The Inquisitr. January 2, 2009] - "The argument that journalism is dying has already been disproved many times before. It is the last argument of those unable to adapt to the new reality of publishing news. Quite the opposite, journalism, in its many forms is the strongest it has ever been in the history of man kind. No longer is the written word the exclusive domain of an elite few, and guided by media proprietors with set agendas." |
- | *'''Newspapers add little value at present; should be allowed to die.''' [http://www.worldnetdaily.com/index.php?fa=PAGE.view&pageId=96292 Joseph Farah. "Bail out newspapers?". World News Net. April 28, 2009]: "Now, it occurs to me that Brooks is laboring under the delusion that newspapers like the one that formerly employed her services are actually doing investigative journalism into government waste, fraud, abuse and corruption. They aren't. They haven't been for a long time. [...] And this is the very reason they are going bankrupt. No one wants to read them any more – at any price. They have out-served their usefulness." | + | *'''[[Argument: Daily newspapers add little, let them die| Daily newspapers add little, let them die]]''' [http://www.worldnetdaily.com/index.php?fa=PAGE.view&pageId=96292 Joseph Farah. "Bail out newspapers?". World News Net. April 28, 2009]: "Now, it occurs to me that Brooks is laboring under the delusion that newspapers like the one that formerly employed her services are actually doing investigative journalism into government waste, fraud, abuse and corruption. They aren't. They haven't been for a long time. [...] And this is the very reason they are going bankrupt. No one wants to read them any more – at any price. They have out-served their usefulness." |
- | + | ||
- | *'''Newspapers can succeed by adopting new media.''' [http://www.inquisitr.com/14118/journalist-calls-for-government-assistancefor-journalists/ Duncan Riley. "Journalist Calls For Government Assistance…For Journalists". The Inquisitr. January 2, 2009] - "That some journalists are finding it tough does not equal there is no money to be had either. Smart journalists, and media companies have embraced new media, and while they may not have replaced their offline revenue streams in full yet, even during the recession online streams at some outlets have actually increased at a time print advertising in particular is dying. The true difference today is that the closed markets of old have been replaced by open markets with vibrant competition, and it is in these spaces that some journalists believe that the market is unfair. The time of Journalism as a closed shop with life long opportunities has passed." | + | |
+ | *'''[[Argument: Newspapers can succeed by adopting new media| Newspapers can succeed by adopting new media]]''' [http://www.inquisitr.com/14118/journalist-calls-for-government-assistancefor-journalists/ Duncan Riley. "Journalist Calls For Government Assistance…For Journalists". The Inquisitr. January 2, 2009] - "That some journalists are finding it tough does not equal there is no money to be had either. Smart journalists, and media companies have embraced new media, and while they may not have replaced their offline revenue streams in full yet, even during the recession online streams at some outlets have actually increased at a time print advertising in particular is dying. The true difference today is that the closed markets of old have been replaced by open markets with vibrant competition, and it is in these spaces that some journalists believe that the market is unfair. The time of Journalism as a closed shop with life long opportunities has passed." | ||
|- | |- | ||
Line 89: | Line 78: | ||
====Con==== | ====Con==== | ||
- | *'''[[Argument: Subsidization would damage independence of journalism| Subsidization would damage independence of journalism]]''' [http://online.wsj.com/article/SB123353263226537457.html?mod=rss_topics_obama "Bad News in Philadelphia. The worst bailout idea so far: newspapers." Wall Street Journal, Editorial. February 2, 2009]: "newspapers aren't the lifeblood of anything if they are merely an adjunct of the state. Independent journalism is valuable, but only if it is truly independent. A newspaper that is bankrolled by the state, even if it's only a loan, is going to have a strong interest in not criticizing the state." | + | *'''[[Argument: Subsidization would damage independence of journalism| Subsidization would damage independence of journalism]]''' [http://news.cnet.com/8301-13578_3-9787518-38.html Declan McCullagh. "Should you be taxed to subsidize 'The New York Times'?". CNET. September 28, 2007] - "The main reason I say the answer should be [that government do] nothing [for the journalism industry] is that government money tends to come with strings attached. Sure, at first, a handout may seem free. But over time, that tends to change. Look at the ongoing controversies over the National Endowment for the Arts. In response to controversial photographs (including a provocative retrospective of photographer Robert Mapplethorpe's work) in an NEA-funded exhibit, Congress did two things. It reduced the NEA's budget for the next fiscal year and then slapped a new restriction on the agency, saying that its grants must take 'into consideration general standards of decency and respect for the diverse beliefs and values of the American public.'" |
- | :[http://news.cnet.com/8301-13578_3-9787518-38.html Declan McCullagh. "Should you be taxed to subsidize 'The New York Times'?". CNET. September 28, 2007] - "The main reason I say the answer should be [that government do] nothing [for the journalism industry] is that government money tends to come with strings attached. Sure, at first, a handout may seem free. But over time, that tends to change. Look at the ongoing controversies over the National Endowment for the Arts. In response to controversial photographs (including a provocative retrospective of photographer Robert Mapplethorpe's work) in an NEA-funded exhibit, Congress did two things. It reduced the NEA's budget for the next fiscal year and then slapped a new restriction on the agency, saying that its grants must take 'into consideration general standards of decency and respect for the diverse beliefs and values of the American public.'" | + | *'''[[Argument: Subsidization damages journalism's freedom to criticize| Subsidization damages journalism's freedom to criticize]]''' [http://news.cnet.com/8301-13578_3-9787518-38.html Declan McCullagh. "Should you be taxed to subsidize 'The New York Times'?". CNET. September 28, 2007] - "One argument for tax subsidies, and the Columbia Journalism Review article invokes it at length, is that newspapers' 'role of informing citizens is crucial to democracy' through aggressive reporting on government malfeasance. But supporting that kind of aggressive reporting, it seems to me, is the worst argument for government funding--it would be the first type of reporting killed, openly or covertly, when the inevitable political pressure is brought to bear. (I wonder if I'd even be permitted to write this commentary if my salary were paid by the government. And would a taxpayer-subsidized newspaper ever publish an editorial calling for lower taxes?)" |
- | + | ||
- | *'''Subsidization damages journalism's freedom to criticize government.''' [http://news.cnet.com/8301-13578_3-9787518-38.html Declan McCullagh. "Should you be taxed to subsidize 'The New York Times'?". CNET. September 28, 2007] - "One argument for tax subsidies, and the Columbia Journalism Review article invokes it at length, is that newspapers' 'role of informing citizens is crucial to democracy' through aggressive reporting on government malfeasance. But supporting that kind of aggressive reporting, it seems to me, is the worst argument for government funding--it would be the first type of reporting killed, openly or covertly, when the inevitable political pressure is brought to bear. (I wonder if I'd even be permitted to write this commentary if my salary were paid by the government. And would a taxpayer-subsidized newspaper ever publish an editorial calling for lower taxes?)" | + | |
+ | *'''[[Argument: Journalism bailout would be payoff for biased election coverage| Journalism bailout would be payoff for biased election coverage]]''' [http://www.ourblook.com/The-Media/Gov-t-Bailout-for-Newspapers.html Gerry Storch. "Gov't Bailout for Newspapers?". Our Blook]: "Consider also that many people feel America's newspapers were basically in the tank for Obama with slanted coverage during last year's presidential election. As Washington Post ombudsman Janet Howell wrote after the election, 'I'll bet that most Post journalists voted for Obama. I did.' If papers were now to take a bailout from the Obama administration, wouldn't it have the look ... and smell ... of a payoff?" | ||
Line 127: | Line 115: | ||
:Ben Scott, policy director of Free Press, testified at an April 2009 Congressional hearing against any government bailout of journalism: "It is especially important to resist the temptation of bailouts because the first papers to fail will be those who least deserve a bailout. Those are the papers whose own business decisions placed them under a crushing debt-load in pursuit of consolidated ownership and short-term gains. Few could welcome handing Sam Zell a fat check from the Treasury after his ill-fated adventure with the Tribune Company. That’s not to say we should let the journalism or the journalists fade away. But there are other ways to preserve those critical elements that do not involve bailouts."[http://www.usnews.com/blogs/risky-business/2009/4/22/newspaper-bailouts-criticized-on-the-hill.html] | :Ben Scott, policy director of Free Press, testified at an April 2009 Congressional hearing against any government bailout of journalism: "It is especially important to resist the temptation of bailouts because the first papers to fail will be those who least deserve a bailout. Those are the papers whose own business decisions placed them under a crushing debt-load in pursuit of consolidated ownership and short-term gains. Few could welcome handing Sam Zell a fat check from the Treasury after his ill-fated adventure with the Tribune Company. That’s not to say we should let the journalism or the journalists fade away. But there are other ways to preserve those critical elements that do not involve bailouts."[http://www.usnews.com/blogs/risky-business/2009/4/22/newspaper-bailouts-criticized-on-the-hill.html] | ||
- | *'''Journalism can monetize demand without government bailout.''' [http://news.cnet.com/8301-13578_3-9787518-38.html Declan McCullagh. "Should you be taxed to subsidize 'The New York Times'?". CNET. September 28, 2007] - "I'm not sure what's going to happen to newspapers in their current form, but I am optimistic about the future of journalism. My own employer, CNET Networks, has found a way to make money by publishing news and reviews without collecting taxpayer handouts. If readers (or viewers) continue to want original reporting, and I believe they will, news organizations will find a way to meet that market demand. Without a taxpayer bailout, newspapers may not look exactly like they do today, but journalism itself will remain alive and well." | + | *'''[[Argument: Journalism can monetize demand without government bailout| Journalism can monetize demand without government bailout]]''' [http://news.cnet.com/8301-13578_3-9787518-38.html Declan McCullagh. "Should you be taxed to subsidize 'The New York Times'?". CNET. September 28, 2007] - "I'm not sure what's going to happen to newspapers in their current form, but I am optimistic about the future of journalism. My own employer, CNET Networks, has found a way to make money by publishing news and reviews without collecting taxpayer handouts. If readers (or viewers) continue to want original reporting, and I believe they will, news organizations will find a way to meet that market demand. Without a taxpayer bailout, newspapers may not look exactly like they do today, but journalism itself will remain alive and well." |
+ | :[http://www.northernstar.info/article/7258/ Keith Cameron. "Bailing out print journalism would only prolong the inevitable". Northern Star. April 15, 2009]: "The industry as a whole does not need to be saved, and news reporting can still be profitable without government aid." | ||
|- | |- | ||
Line 143: | Line 132: | ||
====Con==== | ====Con==== | ||
- | *'''NPR/PBS are examples subsidization coming with strings.''' [http://news.cnet.com/8301-13578_3-9787518-38.html Declan McCullagh. "Should you be taxed to subsidize 'The New York Times'?". CNET. September 28, 2007] - "I'm sure that at this point, some readers might be thinking, 'What about National Public Radio? It's taxpayer-supported, right?' Yes. NPR and PBS receive about 15 percent of their combined budget from the government. [...] Even though that's not a huge amount by percentage, it has made NPR the target of political threats by President Richard Nixon and House Speaker Newt Gingrich, both Republicans, to eliminate its funding. Conservatives say NPR itself has admitted a liberal bias while liberals accuse it of being elitist. Do newspapers really want that controversy spilling over into their pages?" | + | *'''[[Argument: NPR/PBS demonstrate how subsidization impairs journalism| NPR/PBS demonstrate how subsidization impairs journalism]]''' [http://news.cnet.com/8301-13578_3-9787518-38.html Declan McCullagh. "Should you be taxed to subsidize 'The New York Times'?". CNET. September 28, 2007] - "I'm sure that at this point, some readers might be thinking, 'What about National Public Radio? It's taxpayer-supported, right?' Yes. NPR and PBS receive about 15 percent of their combined budget from the government. [...] Even though that's not a huge amount by percentage, it has made NPR the target of political threats by President Richard Nixon and House Speaker Newt Gingrich, both Republicans, to eliminate its funding. Conservatives say NPR itself has admitted a liberal bias while liberals accuse it of being elitist. Do newspapers really want that controversy spilling over into their pages?" |
Line 191: | Line 180: | ||
|- | |- | ||
|colspan="2" width="45%" bgcolor="#F2F2F2" style="border:1px solid #BAC5FD;padding:.4em;padding-top:0.5em;"| | |colspan="2" width="45%" bgcolor="#F2F2F2" style="border:1px solid #BAC5FD;padding:.4em;padding-top:0.5em;"| | ||
- | |||
===Pro/con sources=== | ===Pro/con sources=== | ||
Line 206: | Line 194: | ||
*[http://www.boston.com/bostonglobe/editorial_opinion/oped/articles/2009/02/02/aiding_tomorrows_journalists_today/ David Scharfenberg. "Aiding tomorrow's journalists today". Boston Globe. February 2, 2009] | *[http://www.boston.com/bostonglobe/editorial_opinion/oped/articles/2009/02/02/aiding_tomorrows_journalists_today/ David Scharfenberg. "Aiding tomorrow's journalists today". Boston Globe. February 2, 2009] | ||
*[http://www.huffingtonpost.com/rob-kall/bail-out-investigative-jo_b_151085.html Rob Kall. December 17, 2008. "Bail Out Investigative Journalists". Huffington Post. December 17, 2008] | *[http://www.huffingtonpost.com/rob-kall/bail-out-investigative-jo_b_151085.html Rob Kall. December 17, 2008. "Bail Out Investigative Journalists". Huffington Post. December 17, 2008] | ||
- | + | *[http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2009/mar/24/regional-newspapers-lay-offs Polly Toynbee. "This is an emergency. Act now, or local news will die". The Guardian. March 24th, 2009] | |
+ | *[http://blog.seattlepi.com/davidhorsey/archives/161954.asp David Horsey. "No Bailout of the Truthtellers". Seattle PI. February 13, 2009] | ||
|WRITE CONTENT FOR THE "Pro" BOX ABOVE THIS CODE width="45%" bgcolor="#F2FAFB" style="border:1px solid #BAC5FD;padding:.4em;padding-top: 0.5em;"| | |WRITE CONTENT FOR THE "Pro" BOX ABOVE THIS CODE width="45%" bgcolor="#F2FAFB" style="border:1px solid #BAC5FD;padding:.4em;padding-top: 0.5em;"| | ||
Line 216: | Line 205: | ||
*[http://www.worldnetdaily.com/index.php?fa=PAGE.view&pageId=96292 Joseph Farah. "Bail out newspapers?". World News Net. April 28, 2009] | *[http://www.worldnetdaily.com/index.php?fa=PAGE.view&pageId=96292 Joseph Farah. "Bail out newspapers?". World News Net. April 28, 2009] | ||
*[http://online.wsj.com/article/SB123353263226537457.html?mod=rss_topics_obama "Bad News in Philadelphia. The worst bailout idea so far: newspapers." Wall Street Journal, Editorial. February 2, 2009] | *[http://online.wsj.com/article/SB123353263226537457.html?mod=rss_topics_obama "Bad News in Philadelphia. The worst bailout idea so far: newspapers." Wall Street Journal, Editorial. February 2, 2009] | ||
- | + | *[http://craig-mcgill.com/2009/03/polly-toynbee-on-saving-the-media-turn-back-the-clock-ask-for-government-help/ "Polly Toynbee on saving the media: turn back the clock, ask for government help". March 24, 2009] | |
- | + | *[http://www.northernstar.info/article/7258/ Keith Cameron. "Bailing out print journalism would only prolong the inevitable". Northern Star. April 15, 2009] | |
+ | *[http://joshuadelung.blogspot.com/2008/12/why-no-bailout-for-newspaper-business.html "Why No Bailout for the Newspaper Business? You Can't Resuscitate a Corpse.". December 23, 2008] | ||
+ | *[http://www.ourblook.com/The-Media/Gov-t-Bailout-for-Newspapers.html Gerry Storch. "Gov't Bailout for Newspapers?". Our Blook] | ||
+ | *''Gerry Storch. "Government Bailout of Newspapers? Bad Idea". Ezine Article'' | ||
|- | |- | ||
Line 229: | Line 221: | ||
[[Category:Journalism]] | [[Category:Journalism]] | ||
+ | [[Category:Free speech]] | ||
+ | [[Category:Politics]] | ||
+ | [[Category:Media]] | ||
+ | [[Category:Government]] | ||
+ | [[Category:Government funding]] | ||
[[Category:Government subsidies]] | [[Category:Government subsidies]] | ||
[[Category:Government intervention]] | [[Category:Government intervention]] | ||
+ | [[Category:Government bailout]] | ||
[[Category:Business]] | [[Category:Business]] | ||
- | [[Category:Markets]] | + | [[Category:Capitalism]] |
+ | [[Category:Socialism]] | ||
+ | [[Category:Political systems]] | ||
+ | [[Category:United States]] | ||
+ | [[Category:Taxes]] |
Current revision
[Edit] Background and contextIn 2008 and 2009, journalism entered what many called a crisis in its existence, with many newspapers and media companies failing to become profitable in the wake on significant shifts to online content and online advertising, in the face of rising competition from classifieds services such as Ebay and Craigslist, and in the face of the 2009 and 2009 financial crisis.[[Image:United States With many major newspapers closing down, such as the Seattle PI and Rocky Mountain News, media companies declaring bankruptcy, The Tribune Company (which owns many of US newspapers) - including the Los Angeles Times - filing for bankruptcy protection in December of 2008, and with significant government bailouts going to the banking and automobile manufacturing industry, many began calling for a "bailout" or government subsidization for the journalism industry.
|
[Edit] [ ![]() Public good: Is journalism a public good warranting of subsization? | |
[Edit] Pro
|
[Edit] Con
|
[Edit] [ ![]() Crisis? Is journalism in crisis? | |
[Edit] Pro
|
[Edit] Con
|
[Edit] [ ![]() Independence: Can journalism remain independent while receiving subsidies? | |
[Edit] Pro
|
[Edit] Con
|
[Edit] [ ![]() Free markets: Is it best to leave journalism to the markets? | |
[Edit] Pro
|
[Edit] Con
|
[Edit] [ ![]() NPR/PBS: Are these organizations good examples of subsidization? | |
[Edit] Pro
|
[Edit] Con
|
[Edit] [ ![]() Decentralized journalism: Is decentralized journalism and citizen journalism inadequate? | |
[Edit] Pro
|
[Edit] Con |
[Edit] [ ![]() Postal rates: Should governments cut postal rates for some newspapers? | |
[Edit] Pro
|
[Edit] Con |
[Edit] [ ![]() Subsidizing viewers/readers: Should governments subsidize viewers/readers? | |
[Edit] Pro
|
[Edit] Con |
[Edit] [ ![]() Pro/con sources | |
[Edit] Pro
|
[Edit] Con
|
[Edit] External links |