Archive

Editorial: Congress should support antitrust safe harbor legislation for newspapers | TribLIVE.com
Featured Commentary

Editorial: Congress should support antitrust safe harbor legislation for newspapers

NewsprintTariffs88325jpg099db
In this April 11, 2018, photo, production workers print and sort newspapers at the Janesville Gazette Printing & Distribution plant in Janesville, Wis. Newspaper publishers across the U.S. already strapped by years of declining revenue say they're dealing with an existential threat: Recently imposed tariffs on Canadian newsprint driving up their business costs. (Angela Major/The Janesville Gazette via AP)

Information provided by news publishers is essential to our democracy. And now more than ever, it’s important to remind our political leaders of the critical role we play in society.

In the upcoming midterm elections, much is at stake. News consumption skyrockets, yet newspapers have experienced years of revenue decline. We need leaders in Congress who will aid us in not only supporting our editorial independence, but our financial independence — we cannot continue to be the voice of the people if we can no longer invest in delivering high-quality news.

Today, in an effort to secure that independence, we call upon our senators and representatives to support the Journalism Competition and Preservation Act of 2018, which would help create an antitrust safe harbor for the news publishing industry to be able to collectively negotiate with the tech platforms. The bill would provide a time-limited period in which news publishers who produce original content and hire reporters can negotiate collectively and withhold content.

For the better part of a century, news publishers have relied on advertising revenue to financially support in-depth investigative reporting and high-quality local coverage. But while Google and Facebook have allowed information to spread faster and farther than ever before, they’ve also stepped in between publishers and readers and broken apart the basic economics of the news industry. Not only do those two companies attract the vast majority of all digital advertising revenue, they also actively and purposefully manage what kinds of news people are exposed to and when.

An antitrust safe harbor such as that proposed in the Journalism Competition and Preservation Act would provide a four-year window for newspaper companies to negotiate fair terms with the platforms that would flow earned subscription and advertising dollars generated from their content back to the publishers, while protecting and preserving Americans’ right to access quality news. Parameters included in the bill ensure that these negotiations would strictly benefit Americans and news publishers at-large, not just one or a few publishers. It is a pro-market, limited government solution to a critical problem.

We are not the only ones being harmed by the duopoly — our readers have the right to demand a more diversified, vibrant digital landscape and continued access to quality journalism. Now is the time for our representatives to join us and show that they, too, care about the future of the digital landscape — and the future of news.

— News Media Alliance

TribLIVE commenting policy

You are solely responsible for your comments and by using TribLive.com you agree to our Terms of Service.

We moderate comments. Our goal is to provide substantive commentary for a general readership. By screening submissions, we provide a space where readers can share intelligent and informed commentary that enhances the quality of our news and information.

While most comments will be posted if they are on-topic and not abusive, moderating decisions are subjective. We will make them as carefully and consistently as we can. Because of the volume of reader comments, we cannot review individual moderation decisions with readers.

We value thoughtful comments representing a range of views that make their point quickly and politely. We make an effort to protect discussions from repeated comments either by the same reader or different readers

We follow the same standards for taste as the daily newspaper. A few things we won't tolerate: personal attacks, obscenity, vulgarity, profanity (including expletives and letters followed by dashes), commercial promotion, impersonations, incoherence, proselytizing and SHOUTING. Don't include URLs to Web sites.

We do not edit comments. They are either approved or deleted. We reserve the right to edit a comment that is quoted or excerpted in an article. In this case, we may fix spelling and punctuation.

We welcome strong opinions and criticism of our work, but we don't want comments to become bogged down with discussions of our policies and we will moderate accordingly.

We appreciate it when readers and people quoted in articles or blog posts point out errors of fact or emphasis and will investigate all assertions. But these suggestions should be sent via e-mail. To avoid distracting other readers, we won't publish comments that suggest a correction. Instead, corrections will be made in a blog post or in an article.