On The Media is produced by:
Iran and Lebanon held elections this week. Iraq saw a spike in violence. A hotel bombing hit Pakistan. There's so much to cover around the world and increasingly fewer news outlets can afford to do it. McClatchy's Mark Seibel wrote a candid piece about his news organization's struggle to keep its foreign bureaus alive.
Interesting and disturbing report. It would be fascinating to hear a follow on piece regarding the degree to which NPR itself has become dependent on the BBC as a source for foreign news.
You would think Berkeley would have a vital local newspaper and it did for several years. Unfortunately the Daily Planet has been reduced to a weekly print paper and a sporadic online source for local news. You might think the Daily Planet is a victim of the economy just like every other newspaper in the U.S. That is only partially true. A group of "readers" have taken exception to some of the reporting and have begun a vendetta to destroy the paper. They single out advertisers and try to intimidate them to withdraw their advertising. This seems like dirty pool to me. Is it unusual? Getting international and national news may be difficult and getting harder but getting local news is nigh unto impossible.
I was listening to how the editor from McClatchy was listing the stories that were broken about how we were lied into the Iraq war and the genecide in Sudan and how with fewer eyes and ears around the world these stories might stay hidden in the future. And I thought, the American public would probably prefer NOT TO KNOW that the president sent us to war on lies and they'd rather not know about genicide most anywhere in the world.
The United States has a long history of Isolationism and I feel part of the trouble that newspapers, TV and Radio news find themselves in is that people are now able to ignore them. They can find their serious entertainment elsewhere.
No wonder the average mid-sized US Newspaper is declining in profitability and viability. Why on earth would you send a person / maintain a foreign bureau when you could license content on the same from a national newspaper?
I am sure that the average McClatchy reader in each of their markets would have no interest in reading about the Ahmadinejad - Mousavi runoff and the subsequent protests. Even if they did, do you not think that this elite reader would be following the same on ap / bbc / nyt / globalpost or other well known foreign news coverage sites?
In my view, McClatchy should focus on deploying its resources for local news coverage / celebration of local culture, that nobody else provides.
Editors also have a commitment to profitability and sustenance / efficient utilization of the news budget. This seems to be a clear example of how the commitment to profitability and efficient management of the editorial budget just is lacking.
I have to agree with sajith. The article lamented the fact that newspapers in cities such as Baltimore, Boston, and Dallas have severely cut back on their international staff reporters. Maybe I'm just out of the loop or something but why did those newspapers have international reporters in the first place? Shouldn't they be spending their time and resources on covering Baltimore, Boston, and Dallas?
Please keep your comments relevant to this entry. Email addresses are never displayed, but they are required to confirm your comments. All comments on On the Media are moderated. On the Media reserves the right to edit any comments posted on this site. Please read the onthemedia.org Comment Guidelines before posting.
Back to Episode
