Columbia Journalism Review

[Commentary] Based on our research, we have identified key strategies local newsrooms should be considering to reinvigorate themselves.

[Commentary] The biggest potential hazard [for public stations in the aftermath of the incentive auction] is that some stations might not even get the money they’ve won. Remember that half of public TV stations are licensed to some bigger organization, like a university or government, which presents a number of editorial conflicts of interest. Here, it also presents a financial conflict: The license-holder gets the spectrum auction money, not the station. In the best-case scenario, a handful of organizations that were lucky enough to own expendable spectrum in electromagnetically crowded places will be able to use their proceeds to permanently endow their existence. That presents one more hazard: complacency.

[Adam Ragusea is a journalist in residence and visiting assistant professor at Mercer University’s Center for Collaborative Journalism.]

Anyone seeking further confirmation that Donald Trump’s presidency is primarily a media story need look no further than the surprise firing of FBI Director James Comey. According to Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein, Comey was essentially let go for talking to the press. That’s almost surely not the real reason he was fired, but in this case, the media is both a smokescreen and a clue.

Comey’s ouster falls perfectly in line with the administration’s broader positions on media control, leaks, and leakers. It also offers more evidence, in case anyone needed it, of Trump’s overweening desire to control the news cycle.

[Commentary] "What's it like to work at a local newspaper?” That’s the question we asked journalists across the United States at the end of 2016, as part of a new study supported by the Tow Center for Digital Journalism at Columbia University.

The conclusions, derived from an online survey of 420 journalists at small-market newspapers (with a circulation of under 50,000), reveal a cohort that is actively embracing digital technologies and wants to know more about their potential. As a group, they’re also more optimistic about their future than might be expected and keen to challenge the “doom and gloom” narrative about the local news industry.

[Christopher Ali is an assistant professor in the Department of Media Studies at the University of Virginia. Damian Radcliffe is the Carolyn S. Chambers Professor in Journalism at the University of Oregon.]

[Commentary] It's become clear in recent months that President Donald Trump’s growling at the national press has, in many ways, backfired. I’m excited about the press’s reinvigoration, too, but I’m also worried about President Trump’s anti-press words and deeds—and their trickle-down consequences for state and local journalists.

I contacted 16 editors or publishers of state and local newspapers in California, Georgia, Florida, Kentucky, North Carolina, Ohio, Pennsylvania, and Texas to ask if their papers had seen post-election bumps in subscriptions or readership. Their circulations range from 8,000 to 200,000 daily. Seven responded, and only one reported growth. The others didn’t know why they hadn’t seen growth or said their local focus might be to blame. I don’t want to lean too heavily on these results, which are anecdotal. But they only add to my concern that Trump’s anti-press antics will inspire unprecedented attempts to delegitimize the state and local press.

[Jonathan Peters is an attorney and an assistant professor of journalism at the University of Kansas]