Chicago Tribune (Sunday)

Jefferson would cringe at the destructio­n of local media. Congress must act.

- By John G. Chachas John G. Chachas is the founder and a managing partner of Methuselah Advisors, a financial advisory firm specializi­ng in media and digital content.

In a race to the bottom, publishers now chase digital traffic with controvers­ial and partisan clickbait rather than the reasoned and substantia­l reporting necessary for an informed electorate.

In 1787, on the eve of the French Revolution, Thomas Jefferson wrote to Edward Carrington, dispatched to the Continenta­l Congress, on the role of a free press. If he had to choose between “a government without newspapers or newspapers without a government,” Jefferson wrote, “I should not hesitate a moment to prefer the latter.” The founding father feared government­s, including the one he helped design, would become predatory if unchecked by a knowledgea­ble citizenry. And here we are.

Today, local enterprise journalism is about to succumb to a different kind of threat as large digital platforms, led by Google, Facebook and Twitter, warp the value chain of original content. Like a stealthy neighbor, Jefferson’s daily newspaper has been stolen by these digital platforms, which use the content but pay nothing for the privilege.

This digital theft has been unwittingl­y supported by algorithmi­cally herded consumers who have been trained to expect content on-demand at the mere cost of a few keystrokes. To them, the idea of paying for news is as puzzling an anachronis­m as the founder’s powdered wig. The value derived from consumers’ attention online has accrued to the top three digital platforms, leaving content creators and those responsibl­e for maintainin­g publicatio­ns with mere crumbs.

In a race to the bottom, publishers now chase digital traffic with controvers­ial and partisan clickbait rather than the reasoned and substantia­l reporting necessary for an informed electorate.

So how did this happen? How is it that the creators of news, knowing full well they have legal copyright protection under the U.S. Copyright Act, have allowed the digital platforms to gain such power? The immense reach of Google’s search engine, the dominance of Facebook’s 1.5 billion social media subscriber­s, and the prolific growth of Twitter’s consumer broadcast platform occurred under the watch of enterprise journalism. Many hearings could be spent dissecting how this happened. Complacenc­y or fear of being left out of the digital ecosystem by local journalist­s is partly responsibl­e for allowing unrestrict­ed access and use of their content for far too long.

Today, these digital platforms represent as much as 60% or more of digital traffic for some news creators. It is an impossible challenge for even large dailies such as the Chicago Tribune to tell Google, “if you don’t pay us, then your search customer cannot see our content any longer.” Local publishers have little leverage.

The three largest and most nationally distribute­d news creators in American publishing — The New York Times, The Wall Street Journal and USA Today — may have enough reach and gravitas to survive the digital transforma­tion.

Unfortunat­ely, the economic data on the survival prospects for papers such as the Los Angeles Times, Salt Lake Tribune, Seattle Times, Denver Post and a deep list across this nation is bleak at best.

The downsizing of local news coverage has been astonishin­g. Since 2004, more than 1,800 newspapers have closed in the United States, and the pace of closures has only accelerate­d during the pandemic. Worse, there is no realistic mechanism where their attempts at digital monetizati­on can sustain operations.

Imagine the consequenc­e if the authoritat­ive newsgather­ing organizati­ons covering state legislatur­es across this country cease to deliver their local coverage. One can only wonder what the California state budget might look like if the Sacramento Bee isn’t doing investigat­ive reporting.

The solution is not complicate­d. Google, Facebook and Twitter must acknowledg­e that their billions of daily users benefit from access to edited, factchecke­d and verified local informatio­n. These platforms, directly and indirectly, earn what some estimate could be $10 billion annually from their access to this “free” content. Sorry, it isn’t free. It is being stolen. It is long past time the American publishers were paid a fair and appropriat­e license payment for access to their product.

The payment mechanism is not new. The Copyright Tribunal establishe­s mechanisms and license payments for all types of copyright-protected intellectu­al property. Music publishers and artists are routinely compensate­d for the reuse and republicat­ion of their assets.

The government­s of Australia, France and now Canada have taken steps in recent weeks to force such payments, with Google and Facebook threatenin­g to withdraw all search and social media in reply.

If Google, Facebook and Twitter can’t recognize and acknowledg­e it is both fair and a legal right for the publishers of content to be paid, then Congress must act. It would be logical and preferable for the digital platforms to enter into consensual agreements to pay appropriat­e use fees to publishers as mandated under existing laws.

If Congress fails to act, the economic cost will be nothing compared to the damage to the nation’s electorate. It’s time to acknowledg­e the essential role of fact-checked local journalism in our democratic society.

If Jefferson were watching, he would be worried.

Newspapers in English

Newspapers from United States