Letter to the editor: Oppose the newspaper bill!

Cathy Wilson
Cathy Wilson
9

To the Editor:

I am writing to voice my opposition to the so-called “Newspaper Bill” (A4429, S2855). Never have I felt such a strong, gut-level reaction to any bill ever! I find this bill totally unconscionable.

Cathy Wilson
Cathy Wilson

This bill looks innocuous enough on its surface. It would simply lift the requirement for municipalities to post legal notices (of things like public hearings) in the newspaper and allow them to post such notices on their own website instead. Who could oppose that?

This bill is a wolf in sheep’s clothing. It will shut down many local newspapers, drastically reduce local news coverage, and slash investigative reporting. How? By cutting off a key revenue source that keeps many local papers alive. Without it, they’ll go under.

If this doesn’t concern you, I’ve got news for you: It should. This is stealth warfare on newspapers. The old way is to criticize the press. The new way is to eliminate it.

Newspapers perform a vital service — even if you never read them yourself. They have reporters. Who cover local government. Which provides SOME degree of oversight. And helps citizens (who care to) stay informed. No reporters = no coverage = no oversight. If you value freedoms (like freedom of information and freedom of the press), get ready for a drought.

If you value transparency and accountability, this bill is a slap in the face. It eliminates the third party verification of accuracy that newspaper postings provide. Do you really trust local officials not to fudge little details (like dates or locations or key agenda items) when it’s to their advantage to do so? There’s a reason why no other state in the country allows this: It’s not good practice to charge the fox with guarding the henhouse.

As if killing newspapers and damaging transparency weren’t enough, our beloved governor is ramming this bill through the legislature in less than a week (and during the holidays) in the hope that no one will notice. For anyone who is paying attention, his stated reason for pushing the bill is to “save taxpayers money.” This is a bold-face lie. It may even cost money, no one knows.

Worst of all, [State Sen. Stephen] Sweeney [D-3rd Dist] and [Assemblyman Vincent] Prieto [D-32nd Dist.] are in on this deal. This definitely ensures them a special place in Hell. Their complicity is shameful. They deserve our wrath.

I encourage every citizen of New Jersey to pick up the phone and flood every legislator in this state with phone calls. Especially Sweeney (856-251-9801) and Prieto (201-770-1303). Remember: The vote is on Monday. Do it NOW!

And while you’re at it, subscribe to your local newspaper. They need us. We need them. Criticizing them is fine. Eliminating them is not.

Cathy Wilson
Morris Township

Cathy Wilson chairs the Morris Township Democratic committee, and started the Friends of Televised Access to provide video coverage of Township government meetings.

9 COMMENTS

  1. There should be no legal obligation for towns, citizens or corporations to support failing businesses with a financial lifeline. Local government has not been regularly covered in the remaining printed newspapers for sometime now. Readership of printed dailies has plummeted, so the intent of wide/public dissemination of legal notices in newspapers has become invalidated.

  2. Increasing hardcopy subscriptions will not save a newspaper. But a strategic online presence that is relevant and offers the functionality and marketing mobility that the public craves will extend the lifespan of what is currently called a newspaper. Ridge320’s comments echo most people’s sentiments and the harsh reality.

    It maybe an issue of civic concern , but I believe the same transparency and accountability will be present online; and it is up to the public to keep reporters and their news factually correct and in check.

    Just don’t politicize this issue.

  3. My passion for the importance of keeping newspapers in business is a function of my passion for the importance of civic engagement – regardless of what side of the political aisle you’re on. The more people pay attention and participate – on all sides of the aisle – the better it is for all of us.

    Having spent many years of my life teaching civics, I am probably more tuned in than most people to the vital role newspapers play in providing the information we all need to function as informed citizens in a free society. Eliminating newspapers creates an information vacuum that’s totally unconscionable to me.

    I agree with your business assessment: newspapers’ reliance on revenue from legal postings is jeopardizing their survival. Cutting off this one lifeline that’s keeping them alive (particularly when that action creates so many new problems of its own) is – in my view – a mistake. The only real solution is to increase readership. And the only way that’s going to happen is if more people choose to subscribe.

    Which is exactly the choice I’m encouraging: subscribe to your local newspaper. The best reason to do this is not partisanship. It’s civics.

  4. The vast majority of people get their news online, and typically via the same organizations that also publish a printed paper format. The online and mobile content provides the same reporting and plenty of revenue generating opportunity via advertisers, so as a result, printed newspapers will soon be extinct. That’s an unavoidable fact. I’ll miss them when they’re gone, but make no mistake, they’re going.

  5. Newspapers have always been important, but in the Age of Trump, I see them as VITAL. This is not the time to put newspapers out of business. We need the reporters and the coverage and the free flow of information more now than ever before. I hope more people realize this and make an informed choice to subscribe. That’s the best alternative funding source I can think of.

  6. I disagree. The demise of the newspaper will come from lack of readership (subscriptions) due to the public getting their information from other sources and advertisers realizing this mass exodus will seek to place their advertising dollars elsewhere.

    The burocratic, cumbersome and costly process of having to post legal notices, budgets and other municipal financial data to the local paper can be transferred to a website with the same requirement for transparency and accountability.

    Reporters can still due the stories and provide the coverage that their functions have always enabled them to do.

    Yes, a revenue stream for the newspaper will be eliminated but that industry has had many years to prepare and change to meet the challenges created by the internet and social media.

    I don’t see this bill as an intended measure to conceal, cloak or otherwise enable government to be less accountable or an attack on the public’s right to know.

    But it is a another indication that the newspaper industry must continue to re-create itself if it is to survive in its present format.

LEAVE A REPLY