Maybe goverment funding is not the way to go

An interesting story from Nieman Lab for those who feel that government funding should be at the forefront of the campaign to save journalism.

They bring our attention to a study carried out in Argentina which

analyzes Argentina’s four largest newspapers and finds a strong correlation between their willingness to cover government scandal and the amount of money they received from government coffers.

The study found that

1. a “huge correlation” between, in any given month, how much money went to a newspaper and how much corruption coverage appeared on its front page. For example, if the government ad revenue in a month increased by one standard deviation — around $70,000 U.S. — corruption coverage would decrease by roughly half of a front page.

2.They also, in periods where newspapers were getting more money from the government, they produced fewer corruption scoops of their own and covered fewer of the scoops produced by other newspapers. (It should be noted here that the study only looked at the front pages of newspapers — so it’s possible rival papers were writing about the scandals uncovered by their peers.

Government intervention-a warning

David Carr,writing in the New York Times raises concerns about the proposals for the governemnt to intervene in the newspaper industry in the States.

I’m all for journalists swarming the Hill, especially now that about half of the reporters who used to work there are gone, potentially leaving much of government to its own devices. But to leave our industry tin-cupping its way around a government it covers seems desperate and ill-advised: a cure that might be worse than the disease.

he writes adding that

Government bailouts, including special tax status, seem likely to kill independent journalism, not save it. A free press that serves at the pleasure of its government is a diminution of the intent of the founders and not, by the way, a free press.