Blogs and Stories

Lloyd Grove

The Newspaper Savior

Lloyd Grove Elaine Thompson / AP Photo As she becomes the first governor in the nation to funnel taxpayer money into her state's ailing newspaper industry this week, Washington state's Chris Gregoire is being hailed as a crusader for the survival of the press. In an exclusive interview, she talks about why the folding of the Seattle Post-Intelligencer's print edition affected her so profoundly, her own brief stint as a journalist—and why she won't get a free pass from the reporters whose careers she's helping to save.

There are no ink stains on Chris Gregoire’s power suits, but maybe she deserves a Pulitzer Prize for excellence in journalism anyway. With the stroke of her pen this week, the 62-year-old governor of Washington has done more to save her state's struggling newspaper business than two dozen genius publishers—and she just might have started a national trend.

The last time she worked on a newspaper, Gregoire was a teenager in the Pacific Northwest town of Auburn. “I was in middle school, though back then they called it junior high, and I started a school newspaper that I put out every week,” Gregoire told me yesterday. “It was fun for a couple of years, but I never did anything past that. I got called out once by the school administration. They didn’t like the coverage of a dance we were going to have. I look back on it and laugh now. It was a big deal to them that we couldn’t encourage anything that would result in a ‘public display of affection.’”

“I have had my fair share of unfair coverage—particularly during election season,” she said. “But at the end of the day, it’s not about me.”

The 25 dailies and 100-odd weeklies of Washington—many of which are struggling along with the rest of the nation’s newspaper biz—might now be tempted to show their governor a little love. This week she signed into law a 40 percent corporate-tax break for “every person engaging within this state in the business of printing a newspaper, publishing a newspaper, or both”—a measure that gives newspapers the same preferred tax status as Boeing and Microsoft.

Thus Gregoire, a two-term Democrat, became America’s first governor to funnel taxpayer money to the imperiled newspaper industry—but possibly not the last.

“All of a sudden policymakers across the country are in a state of high anxiety about the financial state of the press—for good reason,” said Tom Rosenstiel, director of the Pew Research Center's Project for Excellence in Journalism. “The financial foundation of the press for the last century—advertising—is collapsing in the face of the audience migration to the internet.” But Rosenstiel isn’t sure whether Gregoire’s solution is the right one. “We don’t know yet about the implications of having different policies in every state,” he said, “especially when most media companies operate around the country and in some cases the world.”

But Gregoire has brushed off such concerns to assume the role of print journalism’s Mother Teresa—caring for the sick and dying in her state’s paper business. The situation in Washington is dire indeed. In recent months, the Seattle Post-Intelligencer shuttered its print operation—firing most of its staff and going online only—while the Vancouver Columbian declared bankruptcy.

“Absolutely I miss it,” Gregoire said about the P-I, which closed down in March after 146 years of publishing, leaving the city with a single paper, the Seattle Times. “It gave us a different perspective, whether it was editorial or news coverage. I miss the competition. It has been an icon. In fact, the P-I Globe is standing on the waterfront, and people are shocked that it will one day be taken away. When you go in their building, I tell you, it is heart-wrenching. It almost looks like one day something happened, and everyone got up and left.”

After the P-I’s death, the state newspaper association sent the governor and the state legislature an SOS. A tax-relief provision was quickly passed, but then dropped out of the final budget as officials struggled to close a $9 billion deficit. But, in the waning hours of the legislative session, Gregoire persuaded the leadership to restore the provision, which saves Washington’s $600 million newspaper biz about $2 million in taxes.

“This was to send a message that we have to have a transparent democracy and informed public, and I’m proud my legislature stepped up,” Gregoire said. “We wanted to help a little bit, but it wasn’t done lightly. These are tough economic times—the worst in history since the Depression. We are laying off thousands of state employees and teachers, and we’re cutting people off health care—difficult times. But we did what we could.”

Never mind that Gregoire, like any governor, has taken her lumps in the press. “I have had my fair share of unfair coverage—particularly during election season,” she said. “But at the end of the day, it’s not about me, it’s not about coverage I may object to or think wasn’t fair. It’s about having an informed citizenry, having a watchdog of government at all levels, their investigative reporting surfacing the stories that otherwise wouldn’t have surfaced and bringing about change that otherwise would never happen.”

So on Tuesday, when Gregoire conducted a signing ceremony at the Seattle Aquarium, it prompted gallows quips among the various lobbyists present that the fish weren’t the only thing that was underwater.

Can the governor now expect an easy ride from the press? One of those lobbyists, state newspaper association director Rowland Thompson, a fan of Gregoire, said the governor shouldn’t expect her coverage to turn more favorable as a result of her largesse.

“No, not at all,” Thompson told me. “She got lit up the day she signed the bill.”

Lloyd Grove is a frequent contributor to New York magazine and was a contributing editor for Condé Nast Portfolio. He wrote a gossip column for the New York Daily News from 2003 to 2006. Prior to that, he wrote the Reliable Source column for the Washington Post, where he spent 23 years covering politics, the media, and other subjects.


View as Multiple Pages
Back to Top
May 15, 2009 | 8:16am
Facebook
|
Twitter
|
Digg
|
|
Emails
|
print
Comments ()

Banjo1

Newspapers wrote off half their audience when they took their big lurch to the left. Even if the internet hadn't come along, this was a fatal threat to their long-term interests.

|
|
Reply
|
9:10 am, May 15, 2009

salliebingham

Since lefties in this country number fewer than fifty percent of the population, it might be more reasonable to connect newspapers' dwindling market to their failure to cover news of importance to women--fifty-one percent of the population--, their dropping of women columnists, failure to hire or to pay women reporters at the same rate that they hire and pay men, and their advertisers' insistence on pitching their ads to a young male audience that often doesn't read. THE REAL QUESTION IS: WHERE ARE THE WOMEN?

|
|
Reply
11:56 am, May 15, 2009

Lucilius

How's the weather on your planet, Banjo1? Over here on Earth, it's not only a nice day - but more people are reading news than ever. They're just not paying for it.

I am utterly bored with the constant smog about "lefty media, lefty media, lefty media." Check actual readership: dropping in print, sure, but exploding online. And the same is just as true for regular, professional (what you call "leftist") outlets as for right-wing mouthpieces.

The problem isn't political slant. It's money. People have become accustomed to reading for free, and advertisers will only pay a fraction of print rates for online ads, yet the cost of finding and writing news hasn't dropped. It's that simple.

Your myth of "big lurch to the left" is just that - a myth.

|
|
Reply
11:26 am, May 19, 2009

VoodooTiger

We as a nation are doomed to live in the past way of thinking until this generation (Baby Boomers afraid of change) die off. More money wasted. Think of the amount of trees that could have been saved.

|
|
Reply
12:03 pm, May 15, 2009

AliceJ

And, by the way Mr. Grove, the Seattle Times almost always endorses Republicans. They supported Gregoire's opponent in the race for governor. So, should the Governor "expect her coverage to turn more favorable"? History would say that she knows better and that she's after a different goal.

|
|
Reply
12:25 pm, May 15, 2009

sophia5

Earth to the Governor.

The 20-something generation does not buy newspapers.

They get their news from something called the internet.

Just throwing money at the problem doesn't fix it,
as the saying goes " like rearranging the furniture on the Titanic, "
only in this case the the ship has already sunk.

One format that seems to have appeal is the
Tabloid center single fold layout, easier to hold,
and easier to read, and littered with ads.

Maybe that's the way to go to save the newspaper industry.

|
|
Reply
1:29 pm, May 15, 2009

oliverckerr

Governments can stop taxing the sale of noose papers. The federal governments can make the cost of a home subscription tax deductible. The feds can also purchase pages in every issue with information, jobs, etc available in all the government agencies.

The government could also print the Federal Record in every noose paper and thus under write our First Amendment Freedom of Speech. This wouldn't cost so much money and it would make the papers healthier.

|
|
Reply
1:45 pm, May 15, 2009

JeremyB

Savior? What good is a 40% tax break when you're losing money?

|
|
Reply
3:48 pm, May 15, 2009

Johnnyappleseed

Glad this woman is not our Govenor,tax papers money once again down the hole.
SUCKERS!

|
|
Reply
9:00 pm, May 15, 2009

esteemnz

Mr Grove confuses issues badly. Allowing a troubled industry to keep more of the money they earn is not "funneling taxpayer" money to the industry. Nor should we entertain the illusion that taxes are "taxpayer" money, it is government money taken from taxpayers. The act of ceasing to take that money is not a subsidy, it is not a means to funnel "taxpayer" money. It is simply allowing a business to keep more of what it earned. I don't call that a subsidy, I call it justice.

|
|
Reply
9:33 pm, May 15, 2009

Grundy

We are stuck with this person as our 'first lady of the state' - we have come to know that what she says is usually opposite of what she will do. When she says that she won't hold people accountable to her then you can believe that she will find a way to undercut them if they don't .

|
|
Reply
12:44 am, May 16, 2009

oliverckerr

Publish the Federal Record in every daily newspaper, every day, five days a week, and pay the advertiser price!

That will inform the citizens what their government is doing, and underwrite the papers without interfering in editorial positions.

|
|
Reply
8:37 am, May 16, 2009

KayinDC

Do you also call it "funnel(ing) taxpayer money" to other taxpayers when they get a tax break? Is that how it was reported for Boeing, too? How about when residential tax rates are reduced? Is that a government handout for homeowners?

This is NOT a taxpayer handout to newspapers. The money they will get to keep from this act by the governor is already theirs -- it never becomes tax money. A little accuracy here, please!

Why do media people insist on shooting newspapers in the foot all the time by their reporting on the industry?

And, technically anyway, doesn't a government tax on newspapers really violate the First Amendment to the Constitution?

|
|
Reply
11:35 am, May 16, 2009

lhweston

The governor is to be commended for a nice try! But her scheme is unconstitutional.

"Congress shall make no law... abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press... "

Sure, that is from the First Amendment of the federal constitution, and Washington state has nothing like that (that I can find) in its constitution. Nevertheless, virtually all newspapers today -- no matter how large or small -- participate in interstate commerce in one form or another (i.e. the internet). That pretty much assures that Washington state must comply with federal law in dealing with newspapers.

I don't like the idea of any government - ever - getting involved in newspapers. (Will all editors -- or any editor -- in the future really have the courage to bite the hand than feeds them?)

Oddly, saving our newspapers may be one of the few things that the federal government is equipped to do, really, better than the private sector. But that doesn't make it right. And, I repeat, it's unconstitutional.

There is a better way. We will -- we must -- find it.

|
|
Reply
5:53 pm, May 19, 2009
Leave a comment

Thank you.
As a first time user, your comment has been submitted for review. It can take anywhere from a few hours to a day or two for your comment to be reviewed, depending on the time of week and the volume of comments we receive.

View Comments

The Newspaper Savior

by Lloyd Grove

Info
RSS
Lloyd Grove
Emails
|
print
Multiple Pages
|
text
-
+
Facebook
 | 
Twitter
 | 
Digg
 |