As David Reich-Hale proved in his lower post, if you read about Cablevision’s purchase of Newsday in any other news source you’ll find out that Wall Street was unimpressed with the news and experts questioned why the Dolans wanted the paper in the first place.
Read about it in Newsday and you learn how happy everyone is, how great the deal is for Long Island, how optimistic the publisher is and what a great plan James Dolan has for selling more cable subscriptions thanks to the deal.
Now comes this piece, a real journalistic turd blossom, from this morning’s Newsday, entitled “Dolans giving, but will fight to protect their own.” The article outlines all of the wonderful acts of philanthropy bestowed upon the world by the glowing universal heart of the Dolans.
Here’s a selection:
Cablevision’s deal to purchase Newsday represents a merger of two of Long Island’s premiere institutions, carried out by a family that is both astoundingly wealthy and deeply immersed in the cultural, philanthropic and religious worlds of Long Island.
Reading on, one can’t help but hear the Dolans’ voice in the article, which is pocked with advertising fluff phrases like “premiere institution,” “stunning waterfront home” and “powerhouse family.”
Is this what we can expect, Cablevision advertorials masquerading as news?
“Day by day and almost minute by minute the past was brought up to date. In this way every prediction made by the Party could be shown by documentary evidence to have been correct; nor was any item of news, or any expression of opinion, which conflicted with the needs of the moment, ever allowed to remain on record. All history was a palimpsest, scraped clean and reinscribed exactly as often as was necessary.”
1984, George Orwell, page 36
Here’s some more from the Newsday story:
But the family also is not averse to taking on powerful interests in what some call a bare-knuckled way. They mounted a fight that helped kill plans for a Jets football stadium on the West Side of Manhattan, which could have competed with the family’s interest in Madison Square Garden.
“The Dolans had an economic interest, and used their money to help their business in an intensive lobbying effort,” said former Parks Commissioner Henry Stern. “It was not out of some ideological purpose.”
Reactions to the Newsday deal were generally positive among some Long Island business leaders, educators and planners, who said they welcomed Newsday’s being controlled by a Long Island family. Some said they hoped the move would strengthen and settle down a newspaper that has gone through three other owners in less than a decade.
Shirley Strum Kenny, president of Stony Brook University, said: “They are Long Islanders. It’s not people looking for the business results from afar, and that is definitely a plus.”
Lee Koppelman, former executive director of the Long Island Regional Planning Board, said that, although the Dolans clearly intend to profit from owning the paper, their record of charitable giving on Long Island and their stewardship of Cablevision suggest that the paper is in good hands.
“The Cablevision operation has been somewhat similar to Newsday’s approach in really having a public interest in Long Island’s affairs,” he said. “Tribune did their damnedest to run Newsday into the ground and I don’t think the Dolans will have that approach.”
LIBN and the many other news media will just have to keep Newsday honest. If Newsday can not provide objective and poignant news and intelligent opinion, then it will fail and failure breeds competition.
A prosperous community requires a well-informed population. Cablevision has much to gain from a healthy Newsday.
Time will tell…hopefully, Newsday will tell the truth.
I think there is a sense of relief among many Long Islanders who viewed Newsday’s takeover by News Corp as having a hostile aspect to it. Frankly, so many people bought into the “Tribune is running Newsday into the ground” line from Newsday reporters, who as a class hate anything corporate, that we all thought News Corp could only be worse. Mark this day — you know there will be friction and people (reporters?) saying Newsday would be better off in the hands of News Corp. As someone who cares about quality journalism, I am concerned that this might mean that Newsday continues on its directionless course — one year a tabloid, the next a “serious” investigative rag. Enough already — grow up, be something great! Newsday could be worse things than a Long Island Post.
If you build it … Part Two
So much of the news and information we receive is “bundled” and delivered from multiple sources.
Those of us who use RSS/XML readers on a regular basis know that there is a universe of information out there to be delivered in virtual real time for those willing to do a little exploration.
So if we were constructing a Long Island news and information “portal” or a series of collaborative “portals” what would we need to do?
First of all, let’s be clear. The news and information is already generated by us. We may pay others for a service to distribute it and analyze it, but we are the news and information.
This is not to diminish what media folks do or a particular expertise they may bring to a particular subject, but without us they’re out of business. Much as we elected representatives from the various forms of government to work for our common interests and confer that privilege upon them, so too do we confer the same privilege upon the media.
Much of what we’ve discussed over the past year or so (even back to 1993 for that matter) is directly applicable to this particular product. In fact we’ve explored this theme with the Citizen Media and Citizen Alert posts (among many others) some time ago. I tend to see most of this as inter-related.
A good portion of information is free and one can very easily create a robust information portal and in fact can create a portal that the end user (us) can customize to their own particular viewing preferences.
Moreover we can integrate LYDIA technology (as we are in a number of One Long Island projects already) to create a powerful news and information analysis tool.
The individual will be able to discern what is accurate and factual. How about that!
Ah ha you say, what about the hard hitting investigative reporting we all need to make sure those in high places are not up to low down and dirty deeds!
Again. Think of where most of the leads come from to expose wrong doing. That’s right. You and me.
Will we always need professional investigative journalists? Of course. But they are simply an outgrowth of an investigative public, active and knowledgeable in its own affairs with access to the information and tools necessary in a representative democracy.
We really shouldn’t depend on journalists or elected officials or others to do our homework for us.
Am I advocating the dissolution of all profit based media? No. Advertising dollars pay salaries. Reporters aren’t going to work for free. Someone has to gather up even the “bundled” news although over time this need may dissipate as well.
Am I advocating the fact that an organized and collaborative public can inform itself on an equal, or in some cases superior manner? Yes.
More in Part Three.
The Dolan family would like to control the entire Island and all it’s entertainment venues. That must be the plan. First we have their cable, and get channels we do not want or need, but tough, you get them and you pay for them. They own the sports network and THEIR teams and relegate those teams they have no controlling interest on lower tier channels that can’t be found or are barely watchable. They control a vast majority of our phone and internet connections now, and finally …. our press, which will become nothing more than a vehicle to sell cable upgrades. I think it’s finally time to move off the Island before Dolan tries to buy a baseball team too. This just doesn’t bode well.
Lou,
I am not clear on several of your points.
You write that “professional investigative journalists”… are simply an outgrowth of an investigative public, active and knowledgeable in its own affairs with access to the information and tools necessary in a representative democracy.”
The public has reason to trust a newspaper over a member of the “investigative public.” A newspaper must thoroughly research and vet all stories, lest the newspaper lose the trust of its readers and go out of business. A member of the “investigative public” without the credibility and integrity of the newspaper or established news media is just a source of rumor.
Once the member of the “investigative public” gains credibility and integrity, then that member becomes an established news media.
You write that “an organized and collaborative public can inform itself on an equal, or in some cases superior manner? I doubt it. Moreover, an “organized and collaborative public” is an oxymoron.
Finally, I agree that we should let politicians do our homework for us. However, I would tend to give more weight to a journalist.
Successful politicians work to have “right on their side”, while successful journalists work to be on the “side of right.”
The fact is that news media, whether television, cable, newspaper or magazine or internet company, must earn the trust of the pubic in order to survive, compete and prosper. It is the desire to survive, compete and prosper that creates the credibility and integrity.
Newsday will flourish in whatever media remains viable, so long as it retains the trust of enough readers with words that inform and educate.
Correction…I meant to say that “I agree that we should NOT let politicians do our homework for us.”
Cliff:
I guess I just have more faith in the intelligence and fairness of the “general public” than in the “establishment ” variety media. Not that profit is a bad thing, in fact its essential, but it is not always the best source of information.
I’m also less inclined to to require that someone be part of the “established” news media to be credible. One can be independent and be credible. There shouldn’t be a media “guild” that someone needs to belong to.
I also don’t follow your statement how collaborative and organized public is an oxymoron
Thanks for commenting. If you talk a look at my blog http://www.longislandideafactory.com you may more information that interests you.
In fact you should probably start your own blog.
Lou
The role of the “general public” is to behave as customers, not run newspapers…customers will either buy and/or read Newsday, if the content is truthful and informative or customers will neither buy nor read Newsday, because the content is overly biased and not informative…in the later case, Newsday will eventually go out of business and/or another newspaper will fill the void.
The general public is not well suited to govern, thus the failure of pure democracy or mob rule.
The general public is very well suited to determine whether the private sector is offerring a needed good or service, thus the success of a free market.