Friday, November 02, 2012
Breaking Trust
Newspapers have played an important role in American
politics: To help citizens make choices about who best represents their
interests come Election Day. Thus in the
2012 presidential election cycle, around 200 newspapers have made their
endorsement for a presidential candidate, including nineteen Ohio newspapers
such as the “Akron Beacon Journal”, the “Cleveland Plain Dealer”, the “Columbus
Dispatch”, and “The Cincinnati Enquirer”. Notably absent among the endorsers is
the “Dayton Daily News”.
So why has the “Dayton Daily News” decided to eschew this
cherished tradition? Is it they have little faith in either candidate to fix
the significant problems facing the country? Or on the contrary, do they
believe that both are equally capable of fixing the significant problems facing
the country?
Julia Wallace, the publisher of the “Dayton Daily News” has
provided two answers to the mystery. First, she claims that readers do not want
the newspaper telling them who to vote for, but instead prefer an accounting of
the facts for their own personal use in arriving at a decision made on their
own. Second, “some readers” believe the
newspaper is biased, and thus to prove absence of bias, the newspaper is not
picking a side. This will “prove” fair and balanced coverage. And I have a
bridge to sell you.
In the past, citizens used party identification to help cut
through the information morass on Election Day.
But party identification is no longer what it once was—instead, citizens
are left to their own devices to cut through campaign double-speak, negative
advertising, and the partisan vitriol that passes for political discussion on
the Internet.
For many citizens, the last port of refuge in helping them
make their decisions on Election Day is the newspaper endorsement. A 2010 study made this conclusion:
“Newspapers’ political recommendations matter and persuade readers to vote for
different candidates.” If the publisher and editors of the “Dayton Daily News”
were true to their public, they would go beyond just the presentation of facts
and help their readers to vote—even if the reader uses the recommendation to
make the opposite decision—the newspaper has still influenced the decision. And
second, the publisher and editors should not care that a certain segment of the
population believes in media bias. It is certain that these citizens’
perceptions are not going to change because the newspaper has decided to
withhold their choice.
Citizens need help on Election Day. They look to their
friends, neighbors, family members, and to their hometown newspaper to help
with electoral decisions. And when the
newspaper fails to offer that help, it lets down the citizenry. And given voter
turnout over the last 50 years, we need all the help we can get.
