The Argus Leader and Democracy

The editor of the Argus Leader, South Dakota's biggest newspaper, has called for a broad discussion of the "role of journalism in elections." It's a great idea, and it is especially important in South Dakota. The discussion should include the broader question of the delivery of critical information to the state's citizens. While South Dakota used to be a state rich with newspapers, now there are only 11 dailies left in the entire state, and only two of them are owned by South Dakotans (the Madison Daily Leader, as previously noted, and the Pierre Capitol Journal, which is owned by the Hipple family). Many of these dailies depend on the Argus Leader for political news--taken directly from the Argus Leader or through the Associated Press, which often picks up Argus Leader stories--and much of the Argus Leader's political news is written by Dave Kranz. This means, in the lingo of journalism scholars from the 1970s forward, that Kranz acts a "gatekeeper" of political information and as an "agenda setter." If Kranz decides to report something or not to report something, therefore, it has a tremendous state-wide ripple effect (which is why his latest column caused so much protest: see here, here, and here). Note a couple of items from former New York Times editor Howell Raines' apologia in this month's Atlantic Monthly: (1) as small town newspapers continue to be bought up by larger chains, management often sacks reporters, thus the power of the few surviving reporters grows dramatically; (2) and this scary "Times maxim: 'It's not news until we say it's news.'" While Raines can be a blowhard, he's right to be concerned about these problems, and so should the Argus Leader. Given the Argus Leader's massive impact on the political process, it must properly police itself and guarantee that its reporting and selection of stories is fair, un-biased, and conducted at arm's length from political campaigns, i.e. that there is no collaboration between reporters and political campaigns. If it doesn't, it degrades the democratic process by depriving citizens of the necessary information to make informed political choices. Let's see if Mr. Beck's series of reflective editorials grapples with this problem. And finally addresses this issue.