The In's and Out's of this Study of Second-tier News Media and Education Policy: Part Three

Nope. I didn't forget where this discussion was headed.

It's just so easy to get diverted onto side trails and to wander among Elysian Fields of anything but education policy. Not that I'm not enjoying this excursion into the quagmires of policy and legislation. But, hmmmm, quagmires vs. Elysian Fields should say something.

So -- back to the in's and out's of this study of second-tier media. We've issued a cautionary caveat about the tangled web of media ownership. And we've noted what's out as far as this study is concerned: obvious first-tier national and local news organizations, local news organizations without a Web presence, other-than-English news outlets, and one online blog about local education but written by reporters for a first-tier local news organization.

So what's in?

In order to answer that question -- we're getting there, I promise -- we need to look at how the news media landscape has shifted over the last several years. Specifically, we need to look at some upstart new players.

The Pew Research Center's Project for Excellence in Journalism issued its annual report on American Journalism recently. The State of the News Media 2011 made note of a couple of very interesting developments in the area of online news sources which, to no one's surprise, continue to claim a larger percentage of news followers.

The changes are two-fold. First, the players are changing. It's not just traditional news organizations putting up Web sites and sharing news from print to Web and back again. Second, the delivery substructure is changing so drastically that the relationship between news organization and news consumer is convoluted and tenuous.

In fact, the Pew report said, "It may be than in the digital realm the news industry is no longer in control of its own future."

Why?

Mainly because the behind-the-scenes online conduit components are not owned by the newspapers themselves. Print newspapers print their own papers, or hire a printer to do so, and hire delivery people to drop them on people's doorsteps or to fill vending machines. News broadcasters generally broadcast over frequencies owned by their company.

But online distribution is more complicated. As the Pew report points out, device makers, software developers, news aggregators, and social networks each have their own platform requirements and rules. And, while the end user, i.e. the news consumer, doesn't usually pay for news except when he/she buys a new computer (not seen in the same light as buying a news subscription), each of these links in the distribution news chain cost news organizations money.

Of more concern, the news consumer may access the news by clicking on a link on a social networking site -- but the link may have originated with a friend of a friend of a friend in Outer Mongolia. Indirect links make it almost impossible for news organizations to track audience data, which they use to target content and advertising to specific audiences and which is the commodity they sell to advertisers.

The results? The Pew report says, "Financially, the tipping point also has come. When the final tally is in, online ad revenue in 2010 is projected to surpass print newspaper ad revenue for the first time. The problem for news is that by far the largest share of that online ad revenue goes to non-news sources, particularly to aggregators."

Here's the kicker. Those news aggregators -- Yahoo, AOL, Bloomberg, and others -- are developing their own news organizations. Some of them can be considered second-tier news organizations -- for the time being, at least. Another ten years and, who knows?

(See, I told you I hadn't forgotten where we were headed!)

So -- here's what I'm including in this particular review:

Second-tier national media sources:

• The Christian Science Monitor
• Poynter.org
• Media Bullpen

Second-tier state and local (Tampa Bay area, i.e., Hillsborough and Pinellas Counties) media sources:

• Clearwater Gazette
• Creative Loafing Tampa
• Florida Catholic
• Florida Courier
• Florida Sentinel Bulletin
• Jewish Press
• Khaas Baat
• The News
• Tampa Bay Business Journal
• Tampa Bay Newspapers
• The Weekly Challenger
• Bay News 9
• WEDU
• WPDS-TV

Second-tier online newbies:

• Patch.com
• St. Petersblog

Whew!

Who are all these people?

Stay tuned!

Video of Christopher Cross Speaking on Education Policy

Here's a link to an 8-minute video of Christopher Cross speaking about national education policy. The video is an edited version of an almost 90-minute talk Cross gave at one of the Gottesman Libraries, part of Columbia University's Teacher College.

http://gottesman.pressible.org/govan/political-education-national-policy-comes-of-age

Quick Note: Nothing Funny About Stephen Colbert's Super PAC

Check out this Christian Science Monitor article about comedian Stephen Colbert forming -- for real -- a super PAC or political action committee. According to the article, this enables Colbert to receive donations in unlimited amounts from individuals, corporations, and organizations. The superPAC can't donate directly to candidates for office, but it can spend unlimited amounts advocating for or against a particular candidate.

Officially, the name of the super PAC is Americans for a Better Tomorrow, Tomorrow.

[Aside: Does the second "tomorrow" mean "as in now, not next year or ten years from now," which is my guess. But the cynic in me says it also could mean tomorrow as in "I'll do it tomorrow" and "tomorrow never comes."]

Jumping through the legal hoops of establishing a superPAC is a far cry from writing an editorial in a newspaper. But, historically, newspapers have often begun as the mouthpiece of one political party or another. And who knows what goes on behind the scenes.

How does Colbert intend to use the money? Let's turn to another CSM article for more insight.

And here's the fine print from ABTT's home page: Contributions to Americans for a Better Tomorrow, Tomorrow ("ABTT") are not deductible as charitable contributions for federal income tax purposes. ABTT may accept unlimited corporate contributions, unlimited individual contributions, unlimited labor-union contributions, and unlimited PAC contributions. Contributions from foreign nationals and federal-government contractors will not be accepted. *Federal law requires ABTT's best efforts to obtain and report the name, address, occupation, and employer of any individual who contributes more than $200 in a calendar year.


Interesting that the curious reader cannot access the inner workings of the Web site without "joining" by providing an email address -- presumably, anyway. The only instruction is "Join Us:" followed by a data entry box, which is then followed by a "Submit" button. I tried entering Curious George, but got an "Invalid email address" note.

Who is on the board? Where is the office located? What are the planned expenditures? How will Mr. Colbert himself benefit?

The only clue to the answer to any of these questions is a link to the 10-page letter from the Federal Election Commission notifying Colbert's attorneys that his request has been approved. That letter is addressed to:

Trevor Potter, Esq.

Joseph Birkenstock, Esq.

Matthew T. Sanderson, Esq.

Caplin & Drysdale Chtd.

One Thomas Circle, NW

Suite 1100

Washington, DC 20005

Stay tuned.