Journalists of the world unite!

It struck me while reading The News about the News by Leonard Downie and Robert Kaiser that the time has come for a revolution. Well, maybe not a revolution, but definitely a social movement. We need a movement powerful enough to derail journalism from its current path.

Let us delve into our repertoire of effective means to bring about the end we are seeking. Marches, sit-ins and bus rides worked during the civil rights movement, but our cause isn’t likely to draw media attention (ironic isn’t it). Barricades and burning cars have worked for the French since antiquity, but Americans don’t look fondly upon prison time. A petition would be very democratic, however, a little less like an uprising.

But a strike, now there is a tried and true means of bringing about change. I’m always a fan of labor unions working together against powerful corporations. Print journalists could create a union and our creed could be “journalists for the democratic dream."

The beauty of a strike is that it would affect the large conglomerations that are dictating how print journalism functions today - poorly. It would affect the government that turns to newspapers as guides for their campaigns (we could target the 2008 election). It would affect consumers, who would wake up not only to an empty doorstep, but also to recycled broadcast news and stale online content.

As Downie put it so eloquently, “the world of news without newspapers would be something like a sleek convertible without an engine” (64). Imagine Americans waking up to find their Hondas won’t start: that would bring the news cameras (besides, they would have little else to report).

I’m getting ahead of myself.

First, we must decide what our end, aim and goal should be. Every journalist in America probably has a list a mile long of problems with the media. Targeting the source problems is the key.

Many breakdowns in print media can be traced back to inept ownership, which is increasingly synonymous with corporate-profit-driven-ownership. A trend that has produced “homogenized ‘reader friendly’ pap, which [I] find deplorable” (91). This beautiful description by Downie of print’s downward spiral leads to the justification of our revolt.

This “pap” is incapable of sustaining a functioning representative democracy. Something that is a primary role of journalism, although today, fewer people seem to believe in the fourth estate or to even know what it is.

Few could argue, however, with Herbert Gans’ statement in Democracy and the News that “the democratic process can only be truly meaningful if these citizens are informed” (1). This statement requires the stipulation that being informed of how election campaigns are running is not substantive to a starving country, nor are the marital indiscretions of politicians. What society needs from us is spinach and lots of it.

Citizens need the information that occurs between elections: how American foreign policy is being shaped, how the government is managing or mismanaging the budget, why there are such drastic social inequalities, what is America’s role in the global economy, where is our free market headed? These are just a few examples, but America needs less surface reporting and more depth to avoid societal malnourishment.

A strike would force corporate owners to listen to our terms. As journalists for the democratic dream we would demand more resources to pursue the Iran-contra affairs of the world, more autonomy for our editors, a reestablishment of the wall between marketing and reporting, investment in technologies to improve print and online capabilities and most importantly, a commitment to democratic journalism.

Before we bring out the picket signs, there is a catch. With more resources and less restraint on expenditure, newspapers could fold in two or three years. A complete turn from market awareness would be the downfall of print. I am the first to admit that the health of a newspaper’s profits is important to me, as it will be my only source of income.

Here is where the beauty of my scheme shines through. Those disgruntled individuals trapped at home with motor-less cars, would suddenly realize what a necessity newspapers are to their lives. In a swirl of guilt at having taken such a resource for granted, papers will be avidly consumed. The American public will eat spinach and enjoy every last spoonful of it. Readers will be more likely to pay for online access to the paper, and the profits will roll in.

For those who believe a strike is unfeasible or that it would become a battle for higher salaries, I leave you with Downie’s comments on journalists: “their willingness to work for relatively modest wages is not evidence of their meekness. On the contrary, the news business attracts ornery, independent, ego-driven individuals who, though they come in many shapes and flavors, often share a crusading sensibility” (73). Our crusade: save print journalism to save America.