Don't Believe the Hype

I can relate to the editorial staff at the Star Tribune. A former reporter at the now-defunct Twin Cities Reader, I know what it's like to be "For Sale." I know how it feels to hope for the best when logic dictates the worst. I know that when management makes assurances it's hard to believe they would lie. I know the corporate spin is seductive. But I've also been bounced off the bottom line, where community interests are negotiable and award-winning journalists are expendable.

So while it's easy to understand why staffers at the Strib say they're viewing the future with guarded optimism, it's hard not to be cynical. Because the only thing more predictable than the politics of a jaded media columnist are the motives of corporate America.

On September 5, Cowles Media--the Minneapolis-based company that has had controlling ownership of the Strib since 1935--publicly disclosed their intention to examine "strategic alternatives." In other words, one of the last family-owned, locally controlled metropolitan dailies in the country is on the block. Frank Parisi, vice president of communications at Cowles, says he's confident the "process" will take more than a few weeks, but less than a year. Industry analysts believe every major media chain will take a pass at the property, estimated to be worth at least a billion dollars. Leading contenders include the Washington Post Company (they already control 23 percent of Cowles stock), the Tribune Co., Times Mirror Co., New York Times Co., Advance Publications, and Gannett Co. Inc. The second largest newspaper chain in the country, Knight-Ridder, has publicly denied interest in the Strib, saying they're committed to running the St. Paul Pioneer Press.

Strib reporter Joe Rigert admits a part of him still hopes (in fact, dreams) the Cowles family will decide not to sell, even though, at minimum, they stand to make a $280 million profit. "The Cowles family had a strong commitment to the paper and contributed to the community. So personally I have major concerns about the end of family ownership."

Despite the inevitable anxieties accompanying any sale, Rigert--like many in the news room--trusts Cowles will look out for the paper's best interests. In memos from publisher Joel Kramer and Cowles CEO David Cox, Strib staffers have been assured that new owners will honor existing contracts with vendors, advertisers, and employee unions. There's even a sense the paper's editorial product will benefit from fresh blood. "We know things are going to change radically,'' one reporter says. "But I don't think there's a concern the paper will get worse. There's no panic. In fact, there's some hope the paper's going to get better."

This rhetoric, these hopes--while comforting--are familiar. Before American City Business Journals Inc. sold the Twin Cities Reader to Stern Publishing, Inc. last March, employees were told not to fret. ACBJ was not in the business of closing papers, chairman Ray Shaw said after announcing his company's intention to explore their "strategic alternatives." In fact, Shaw said, selling the Reader to a company who specialized in alternative newspapers would no doubt be a boon to the underfunded Minneapolis weekly. Even when it was disclosed that rival City Pages was to be purchased by Stern Publishing, Inc., owners of New York's Village Voice, Reader faithful were asked to buy the brighter side. Increased competition would mean increased opportunity.

One month later, Shaw announced Stern had bought the Reader, then left the building. The next day, while staffers at REV 105 were being booted by Disney, Stern President David Schneiderman told the Reader staff to pack its bags.

Of course no Strib scenario ends with the newspaper closing. There are, however, a number of reasons employees should be skeptical of Cowles's corporate-speak, just as Reader employees should've been more skeptical of ACBJ. No matter who the buyer, industry analysts agree there will be a push to downsize, especially since the Strib's wages are above the national average and resources are bountiful. More importantly, the Newspaper Guild's union contract runs out in July, 1998. Whether the Strib's new owners are pro-union or not, they'll have the opportunity to renegotiate terms with editorial staff. In the wake of the failed newspaper strike in Detroit, management will have the upper hand.

"Gannett and Knight-Ridder have taken loses to send a message," labor journalist Jane Slaughter says. "When a newspaper strike is broken in a labor town like Detroit, it's bound to have a chilling effect on any newspaper union's ability to negotiate in any circumstance."

Locally, Newspaper Guild representative Mike Sweeney says language in the Strib contract ensures legal protection for employees in case of a sale. The document includes an "evergreen clause" that allows for negotiations to continue after the contract expires. He's also willing to believe Cowles has good intentions, since they've always dealt with the unions fairly. Still, if an unfriendly company offers the best price, it's hard to believe Cowles won't take it and run. The bottom line, after all, is what matters most.  

Of Cowles's possible suitors, the most feared (and powerful) is Miami-based Gannett, the largest newspaper chain in the country. Responsible for the Detroit debacle, they're roundly hated in the industry. Even the Strib's most sanguine staffers shudder at the mention of the mega-chain, which owns the St. Cloud Times and KARE-TV.

In the last week, though, Gannett has been taken off the short list. Writers at both local dailies have reported that FCC regulations, prohibiting cross-ownership of broadcast and print media in the same market, would force Gannett to sell Channel 11 if they purchased the Strib. Since KARE is wildly successful, industry analysts say Gannett will stay out of the Minneapolis newspaper market.

Jeff Cohen, a media analyst at New York-based Fairness and Accuracy in Reporting, says it's not so simple: "Hell, those rules are so porous. Gannett will just lobby the FCC for a waiver. It happens all the time. In New York, for instance, Murdoch owns the New York Post and one of the broadcast stations. The FCC has been captured by the conglomerates."

Cohen also argues that any nonlocal ownership spells bad news for local reporters and the community they cover. "They'll bring in top editors from other papers in the chain. They'll last a few years, and then they'll get sent to another paper in the chain. Top editors and reporters won't be plugged into their community, they'll be plugged into the corporate hierarchy," he says. "And cost-cutting isn't just a union issue or a resources issue. When they cut costs there'll be more fluff, more cheap syndicated features fed to the public. That's the trend."

Other analysts in the industry, such as former Strib columnist and retired UM journalism professor Arnold Ismach, view Cohen's rhetoric as needlessly alarmist. But in Minneapolis, it's hard to ignore the negative influences of nonlocal ownership, media consolidation, and the evisceration of the FCC. All you have to do it turn on the radio.

Since the Telecommunications Act of 1996 allowed the local radio market to be swallowed by Chancellor Communications and ABC, Inc., individual stations have become nothing more than pawns in a national ratings game. Just last week, to protect KQ morning man Tom Barnard, ABC turned the barely alternative Edge into a hard rocker and announced plans to program X105 (formerly REV 105) with "adult rock" (read Sting and Dave Matthews). Chancellor is flanking its own hard-rocking format, anchored by Howard Stern's morning show, with softer rock on Cities 97 and sugary, risk-free pap on KDWB. From station to station, conglomerate to conglomerate, there's so little difference, so little variety, record-industry executives now refer to Minneapolis as a radio wasteland.

Meanwhile, Alan Freed's Beat Radio, a community-oriented, unlicensed dance station barred from Minneapolis airwaves on November 1, 1996, is challenging the constitutionality of FCC regulations. On September 5, U.S. District Court judge Michael Davis dismissed Freed's claim based on jurisdictional grounds, finding that a circuit court in the District of Columbia, not the state of Minnesota, would be a better setting for constitutional challenges. Freed is planning an appeal. "In these corporate battles, the common person has no say," Freed says. "I know that almost sounds silly these days. But it's so out of whack. It's so dangerous."

COMMUNITY POLICING: Last week, the MPD concluded in an internal investigation that Officer Charles Storlie's shooting of Lawrence Miles, Jr. in South Minneapolis on August 16 was justified. At the same time, in a bald-faced attempt to distract attention from these potentially explosive findings (community advocates maintain the police are engaged in a cover-up), prosecutors in Hennepin County said they were considering whether to charge the 15-year-old with aiming his pellet gun at officers. Apparently spending a month in intensive care isn't punishment enough for breaking curfew and having the audacity to run from armed officers.

Only the Star Tribune determined the story was worth covering at length, and reporter Jim Adams managed a commendable balance between the findings of Sgt. Pete Jackson--the detective who investigated the shooting--and baffled community leaders. High in the story, City Council member Brian Herron was quoted as saying he believed charging the young man would be a mistake.

What's disappointing, not to mention puzzling, is that the Strib waited so long to get Herron's concerns about the case on record. On August 29, the paper was given access to an internal memo Herron had sent to Minneapolis Police Chief Robert Olson. The subject of the memo was mentioned in the Strib and picked up by the electronic media in conjunction with a Community Coalition press conference, but no one identified its source or provided any detail.  

In the document, Herron questions the location of the pellet gun, which Miles dropped, according to at least one witness, before he was shot. He wonders if there was any verbal communication between officers and Miles before the shooting, and points out contradictions between Olson's version of events and those diagrammed in the Strib. "Up to this point, I have reserved my comments and judgment, awaiting the unfolding of evidence in this case," Herron concludes. "I am doing everything I can possibly do to keep this situation from turning hostile or into a circus--destroying what little progress we have made in building trust in our community."

In concert with the media's overall approach to the Miles shooting, the Strib apparently decided the risk of causing an outcry in the community outweighed that same community's right to know.

Sponsor Content


All-access pass to top stories, events and offers around town.

Sign Up >

No Thanks!

Remind Me Later >