LM*
4
THE MEDIA:
Who’s Watching the Watchers?
The creation of press councils in accor­
dance with the seven points outlined could do
much to ensure their success and would do
even more to restore public’s confidence in
news reporting. Leadership in this reform,
however, will be difficult to find because of the
media’s hostility. Government, though large
enough and powerful enough, is barred from
the undertaking. Who then will step forward?
Someone must, for we can no longer be
consoled by the industry’s assurance that they
can police themselves. They have become too
involved in the course of human events to be
without a vested interest. As a nation, as a
people, we must ask ourselves how long we
can remain strong without some check and
balance upon this agent of power.
There are those, of course, who will
counter that the notion of a monolithic
“ industry” intent upon controlling our thoughts
is absurd and in part, they would be right. I
offer here no theories of conspiracy. I
acknowledge that the media speaks with many
voices-though at times they seem to run in
packs. But in the hurly-burly of daily life, people
have little time to shop and compare. Instead,
they ought to be assured that the one paper
they buy, or the one report they hear is
measurable according to some standard of
fairness and that for any abuse, there is an
avenue of appeal. That is no less than what we
should demand; no less than what we deserve.
Comment
The press has recently made much of the
public expense attached to these reports, even
though their publication represents a tradition
that goes as far back as the Confederate
Papers. However, in defense of these works, I
have researched the prior practices of other
county commissioners and found nothing
untoward in these expenditures. Others have
spent as much or more per publication. The
only thing extraordinary is that the press has
chosen now to raise the issue-a splendid
example of selective reporting. For my own part,
I have tried to offset the cost of these policy
papers, approximately $4,000 per edition, with
frugality in other areas of my budget. Last year
alone, I returned $67,000 to the public. The
expense of publishing is miniscule compared
to these savings.
Further, the papers represent only a differ­
ence in degree, not in kind, of money spent to
facilitate communication with constituents-
phones, letters, postage, etc. I believe these
papers have served a public purpose. Apparently
many others think likewise for literally hundreds
of additional copies have been requested
through my office. Discussing public issues with
the public and seeking their thoughts is what I
believe a political figure is obligated to do.