The Press as a Public Trust

We in Santa Barbara have watched our prize winning daily paper go down the tubes so to speak. Through a series of resignations and firings, a unionizing effort, and numerous other pratfalls by the newspaper owner and her boyfriend, best known for being an expert on bottled water but now co-publisher, we have seen the paper disintegrate to the point that there is really little local news.

As many of us in Santa Barbara looked on, a trial took place over unfair labor practices -- eight reporters were fired either for "biased" reporting or for unionizing activities -- you take your pick. But ultimately it was the paper and its reputation that was really on trial -- at least in the court of public opinion.

Although this was posted about a week ago on Craig Smith's blog, I've been wanting to post this and discuss it a bit. This statement comes from a response to the trial written by longtime news writer and Reagan biographer Lou Cannon, a resident of Santa Barbara. Cannon offers his response to comparisons made by Wendy McCaw and her lawyers of herself to Katherine Graham, the former owner/publisher of the Washington Post. McCaw and her lawyers allege that Ms. Graham controlled what went into the paper and that the owner's interference in the paper is to be expected. Cannon offers a strong no to this -- a kind of Barthian Nein to use theological language!

Mrs. Graham, for whom I worked for 26 years, would have explicitly repudiated that notion—put forth by Ms. McCaw’s lawyer Barry Cappello at the NLRB hearings and echoed faithfully by Armstrong—that a newspaper owner can do anything she wants with her newspaper. Don’t take my word for it. Read Personal History, the acclaimed memoirs of Katharine Graham.For starters, she quotes approvingly (page 63) the seven maxims of her father, the publisher Eugene Meyer. The fifth maxim, contrary to the declared views of Ms. McCaw and Mr. Cappello is: “That the newspaper’s duty is to its readers and the public at large, and not to the private interests of its owner.” That’s what Katherine Graham reached—and practiced. She also followed the first of her father’s maxims: “That the first mission of a newspaper is to tell the truth as nearly as the truth may be ascertained.”

Mrs. McCaw and her editorial page editor Travis Armstrong insist that the paper his hers to do with as she pleases, that she has no one to answer to, can use the paper to fight her own personal battles, settle personal scores, and protect her celebrity cronies. Cannon says here clearly that such is not the case. The press has a duty to seek the facts and interpret them as fairly as possible. They answer ultimately to we the people -- that is the public interest. And, if they choose not to serve the greater public interest, then we should cease to support that institution. It is for that reason that I long ago canceled my subscription. It's why I choose not to get my news from Fox. CNN might be biased, so might the LA Times, but neither seeks to be a partisan mouthpiece nor the plaything of a bored billionaire!

It is for this reason -- for the service to the public interest -- that the Constitution enshrines the freedom of the press!!!