OUR VIEW: Feds must not muzzle watchdog

If there’s one thing that has remained a constant throughout this nation’s history, it’s the newspaper industry. That’s not to say newspapers are unchanged from America’s early years. Indeed, nearly everything about newspapers has changed except that they’ve been printed on paper, and even that is changing as publications use the Internet to report stories as they develop. But most people reading this don’t remember a time when a newspaper wasn’t a common fixture in their lives.

Not only do we remember Mom and Dad reading the paper in the evening, many young people earned their first pocket money throwing the local paper onto doorsteps every morning or afternoon. Generations of teens learned the value of hard work and money by delivering papers. It was almost a rite of passage. For many newspapers, those days are over.

This recession has hit newspaper revenue especially hard as advertising has fallen off due to slowdowns in real estate and auto sales, traditional mainstays of newspaper advertising. Some, such as the Rocky Mountain News, have closed their doors entirely. Others have ceased print operations and have made the switch completely to online operations. Most others are staying rooted in tradition while they look to the future, maintaining a printed version and publishing online as well.

As an industry, newspapers are working to remain viable in a changing world. Some will succeed, others will not. It’s those latter ones that have some members of Congress concerned and willing to poke government’s nose into yet another industry where it doesn’t belong.

Rep. Carolyn Maloney, D-New York, and Sen. Benjamin L. Cardin, D-Maryland, have introduced the Newspaper Revitalization Act of 2009, which they say would give struggling newspapers a lifeline. Rather than a direct bailout of the industry, the proposal would allow newspapers to reorganize as 501(c)3 nonprofit corporations.

Although Maloney’s and Cardin’s goal of keeping newspapers alive is laudable, it’s not a good idea. One of the primary reasons the Founding Fathers enshrined freedom of the press in the Bill of Rights was so newspapers, and these days electronic media, too, could keep a watchful eye on the actions of government. Any interference or control by government would endanger that critical role of the media.

It has already happened with television and radio with the Fairness Doctrine, ended by President Ronald Reagan, that required government-imposed balance in what was offered over the airwaves. Stations that didn’t toe the line had their licenses threatened. A revival of the doctrine was feared by conservative talk radio hosts earlier this year, but that furor seems to have died down in recent months. Something similar to the Fairness Doctrine could result from this bill.

According to the Internal Revenue Service Web site, 501(c)3 corporations are strictly limited as to political activities. It notes, “Section 501(c)(3) organizations are restricted in how much political and legislative (lobbying) activities they may conduct.” That would certainly put Our View out of business, and could even affect news coverage. Hardly a day goes by that complaints about the left- or right-leaning slant of a news story in The Gazette. It’s a matter of perspective. And if a paper is 501(c)3, the government’s perception of bias in news coverage could be seen as lobbying. That means the news would be covered as the government wanted or a newspaper could lose its nonprofit status. That would likely be the end of that paper, as it would have already shown it couldn’t make it as a for-profit company.

This is not likely to be a serious concern, though, as the bill isn’t getting much traction in a Congress tired of bailouts and focused on larger issues. A committee hearing on Thursday attracted only three committee members, and the chairman, Maloney, left in the middle of the hearing to vote on another bill. Still, it bears watching. After all, that’s what a watchdog does.