First Amendment on “the block” — Again
Monday, March 13th, 2006When it comes to corporate mergers and acquisitions what’s the difference between the merger of two venerable newspaper chains like Knight-Ridder and McClatchy and the plethora of other corporate mergers and acquisitions? Not much you might say – given this brave new world of entertainment masquerading as news. Still, there is that small matter of the First Amendment. There’s a reason the First Amendment protects news organizations, and that’s to protect the diversity of beliefs, opinions, and the right of a “free press” to challenge the very government its owners pay taxes to. What happens to this diversity — particularly when it comes to editorial and opinion pages — when a single chain owns dozens upon dozens of newspapers, radio and TV stations in markets across the country? What does it mean for the public’s “right to know” information that doesn’t set well with the news outlets’ new ownership? What does it mean to advertisers whose products, services or messages are objectionable to the chain’s ownership? And, what does it mean to the many journalists —columnists, editorial writers, reporters, editors and producers —whose views aren’t in synch with the new owners? But, hey, don’t despair. There is plenty of good news for one group. John Morton, president of Morton Research, points out that despite the depressed market for newspapers, “Knight-Ridder shareholders got a fair price.”
At least it’s fair for someone.