Mixed news on the newspaper front.

Martin, Mike

The news about newspapers wasn't good in the months before 9/11 when the authors of a highly publicized critique gave U.S. newspapers failing grades in a host of readership areas.

"Newspapers used to do things better," said study co-author and University of Illinois communications professor Kevin Barnhurst. "They engaged readers better. They invited people into politics better. They presented multiple voices better. They encouraged argument better. They told stories better."

Once the foremost instruments of democracy, newspapers may now be shortchanging democratic principles, explained University of Missouri (MU) journalism professor Betty Winfield.

Thomas Jefferson repeatedly emphasized the importance of an informed citizenry in a thriving democracy, but "the real issue now is that we are so uninformed," Winfield said. "American newspapers are not engaging us, not informing us, nor showing us why we should care."

News hits a new low

The downward spiral of newspaper journalism continued until well after the U.S. terrorist attacks and probably reached a trough with the Jayson Blair scandal at The New York Times, explained MU journalism professor Charles Davis.

"Journalists became unwilling to ask the tough policy questions that needed to be asked after what happened on 9/11," Davis told SJR. "That was an unusual time--lots of pundits pulled punches when asking questions about intelligence and national security, and the press generally muted criticism of the Bush administration and the government."

While journalists may have temporarily set aside tough questioning, Davis doesn't condemn his profession for the lapse.

"Journalism is a profession of human beings, and the national response to 9/11 was very human," explained Davis, who also directs the MU Freedom of Information Center.

Fortunately, the practice of journalism has seen a recent upswing in vigilance.

"I think the press has regained its teeth," Davis said.

Corporate journalism jungle

Journalists may be hitting their collective stride again, but journalism is--more than ever--a creature of corporate constraints and demands that can diminish the trade.

In their book The Form of News (Guilford Press, 2001), Barnhurst and University of Illinois communications professor John Nerone claim newspapers have become "profane commercial operations" with "cookie-cutter designs, weak local ties, bland conservative politics, and overall obeisance to the demands of the chain."

"Journalists, too often, focus on the easy-and-quick-to-obtain news stories and superficial interpretations of complicated issues," said MU journalism professor Lee Wilkins. "The fault lies not just with individual journalists but with their corporate bosses and individual stockholders."

Davis agrees--to a point.

"One can be fairly critical of the newspaper industry today," Davis said. "Newspaper journalists have to toe the line because newspapers sell brands. In large part, newspapers are a forum for their advertisers."

As a branding forum, however, newspapers can only decline so much before they lose readers--and advertisers, Davis explained.

Intensely conscious of public scrutiny and the need for sound reporting, editors, publishers, and reporters generally work hard to improve the product--even if it seems just the contrary.

"I don't know if there's another profession that works harder at getting better," Davis said, citing the ever-expanding quantity and quality of continuing education opportunities for mid-career reporters and the rapid, journalism-wide response to the Blair and Stephen Glass debacles.

"Glass and Blair--strangely enough--had a positive effect on the profession," Davis told SJR. "Those scandals have made journalists focus more than ever on credibility and getting the facts straight. It's like when you see a bad wreck on the highway that makes you slow down and pay more attention."

Celebrity journalists

"Corporate journalism" has, nonetheless, diminished the distinctive nature of the newspaper, Barnhurst explained. Corporate newspapers are instruments of "monovocalism," where many voices--of local columnists, community members, local leaders, and regional newsmakers--have ceded to a few opinions and stories that enhance the bottom line.

Many of those stories and opinions come from syndicated celebrity pundits, such as Bill O'Reilly and Al Franken, who have infiltrated journalism and blurred the distinction between reportage and entertainment.

"Rush Limbaugh has probably been the foremost practitioner of blurring the line between entertainment and journalism," Davis told SJR. "By reminding people that he is 'really just an entertainer' when questions of journalistic integrity arise, Limbaugh can get away with reporting that doesn't meet the standards of true journalism."

Where activist muckrakers, such as Jacob Riis and Upton Sinclair, once characterized the best in reporting, celebrity news analysts and hurried, superficial scribes who write what others feed them have become a norm, Barnhurst claims.

As Franken, Limbaugh, O'Reilly, Sean Hannity, Ann Coulter, Michael Moore and dozens of other entertainers slowly replace an aging cadre of true journalist/pundits, such as Al Hunt, Robert Novak, and Mark Shields, "journalism is besieged by a whole lot of stuff that isn't journalism," Davis explained.

"When I ask my students why they want to go into journalism and they tell me they want to be the next Oprah or O'Reilly, I tell them they're in the wrong profession," he told SJR. "Journalism represents time-honored traditions that have very little to do with that brand of entertainment."

Internet colonialism

If any trend has continued upward since 9/11, it is Internet use.

Colonies of web surfers have become the new settlers, demanding the intensely focused news that was once a part of so-called "multi-vocal" America.

"Colonial newspapers were the extreme example of multi-vocal reportage," Barnhurst said. "They were like a continuing correspondence between citizens, where a definite community connection existed. It really started to wane in the 20th century."

Multi-vocal news has reappeared on the cyber-colonial Internet, a place that "thrives on debunking sloppy scholarship," MU's Davis explained.

The web can also, however, be a haven for the narrow-minded.

"I expect a person could spend a lifetime on the Internet and never encounter an idea that challenged their own beliefs," Davis said.

Newspapers, ironically, may be an Internet antidote, Davis added, noting that with their broad coverage, daily papers expose readers to issues they might not otherwise encounter on the highly specialized websites they frequent.

"On the web, you can spend every waking minute inhabiting only colonies of people who think, talk and act just like you," he told SJR. "With a newspaper, you get a broader focus."

The outlook for this Internet antidote remains positive, Davis concluded.

"As people get older, they get the house, the car, the kids, the dog and the newspaper," Davis told SJR. "They may be surfing the web all the time when they're young, but nothing beats reclining with a good newspaper as the years go steadily by."

Michael Martin is a science, technology, law and business writer for such publications as UPI and NewsFactor. He is a member of the National Press Club and maintains a site devoted to science news, www.sciencenewsweek.com.