Commentary: Despite loss, press critics still have outlets

After 40 years on the job, the Minnesota News Council is closingdown.

Council President Tony Carideo has said public complaints aredown and so is corporate support for the independent news-reviewoperation. Carideo noted that e-mail and Twitter now providevirtually instantaneous ways for people to raise their concernsdirectly with journalists -- presumably in contrast to therelatively lengthy notification-and-hearing process involved incouncil proceedings.

But even as the Minnesota council closes, a Washington statecounterpart is going full speed, just announcing it has raised$100,000 to match a Gates Foundation grant. This independent group,much like the soon-to-be defunct Minnesota council, provides a placefor anyone to bring a complaint about news coverage. If warranted,there is a follow-up investigation and perhaps even a publichearing.

News councils, which generally include a mix of journalists andcitizens as members, cannot force news operations to cooperate intheir investigations. They don't have legal powers to compelwitnesses or gather facts, and they lack authority to enforce anypenalty, correction or retraction. Though supporters see councils asa way to encourage accurate and fair reporting, opponents haveraised objections ranging from personal pique at "outsider meddling"to an old claim that such private reviews are a first step towardgovernment interference with a free press.

A free press

If any group ought to be open to the idea of receiving andresponding to criticism, it should be a free press. The nation'sfounders provided First Amendment protection for those gathering anddistributing news and information so that the public could be well-informed, and to protect an independent watchdog on government.

There was a national news council in the United States for adecade, from 1973 to 1983, but it never had the support of manymajor news media companies, most notably The New York Times. Alongwith Washington state, Hawaii and New England have councils stilloperating. But in most regions, the idea found little or notraction. Another public-accountability mechanism, the in-houseombudsman, gained a bit more favor -- but only a handful of newsoutlets have such a full-time position.

And there was one inescapable fact that had kept criticism muted:As The New Yorker magazine press critic A. J. Liebling noted in the1950s, "A free press is guaranteed only to the man who owns one."Critics were routed to the limited space in a "Letters to theEditor" section or, all too often, an editor's wastebasket.

The Internet Age has changed all that. Global, instant criticismis now within the reach of anyone with a computer or smart phone.Tweets and blogs, website comments and journalists' published e-mail addresses provide daily opportunities for readers to go aroundthe offending medium and speak directly to fellow citizens.

Ombudsmen

As complements to that direct Internet avenue, news councils --or, less formally, reader panels -- can provide a nongovernmentprocess that can be documented and detailed. Staff news ombudsmencan provide access to editors and reporters and an expectation ofaccountability, right at the source.

And in the latest wrinkle on news-media criticism, a new website,NewsTrust Baltimore, was announced this week to allow readers torate and comment on aggregations of stories published here bytraditional and independent news operations. At this point the siteis described as a several-month experiment, but it's one well worthwatching.

Methods of critiquing the news media will come and go in form andfavor. But the effort to "get it right" ought to be an ongoing onethat welcomes sincere help from any venue.

Gene Policinski is senior vice president and executive directorof the First Amendment Center, 1207 18th Ave. S., Nashville, Tenn.37212. Web: www.firstamendmentcenter.org. E-mail:gpolicinski@fac.org.