For most of my adult life, I was a subscriber to the Chicago Tribune. That ended in November, or a couple months prior, depending on how you measure, since I cancelled but didn’t demand a pro-rate refund for the prepaid portion, and it finally ran out in November. Funny thing is, though, that I can still access Trib content through the app, since I was a subscriber when I first downloaded and logged on. Maybe eventually it’ll catch on, but in the meantime — do I read articles and feel bad about having cancelled? No, not at all, most of the time it just affirms my decision, though it’s more of a hassle to share things online. The quality of the news reporting has gone downhill, and that decline accelerated a couple years ago when they were bought by a private equity company, not because, as was feared, the company was going to impose its own viewpoint, but because, as far as I could tell, the long-seniority, established reporters and columnists accepted the buyouts, either to retire early or to move to another field. It’s my theory that those who stayed put either did so because they didn’t think they could change careers or because their were willing to accept low pay and little career advancement in order to pursue their political causes through journalism. The Trib’s news used to be, well, news; now it’s reporting on immigration by reporters who see it as a tragedy that a migrant might come here and struggle to find work without legal authorization, or see it as an injustice that an employer might use E-Verify and cause it to be harder for people to work without legal authorization. And their other favorite topic is racial justice, including, for instance, a recent story about a new law that increases safety in Chicago mass transit by suspending riders who assaulted passengers or bus drivers, but which the reporter implicitly criticized for disproportionately suspending racial minorities.
And yet there is a reality behind their business decisions: there are fewer and fewer newspaper subscribers, and most of those who subscribe do so simply out of inertia. Newspapers all over are losing money, even the vaunted Washington Post which recently laid off large numbers of writers.
As a citizen attempting to do my civic duty of being informed about the world, it’s frustrating. As a candidate, it’s even worse. How do I, as a low-budget, grassroots local candidate for state rep, get my message out? How does anyone learn about candidates and make their decisions? I certainly talk to many people, and read the assertions of many more, who say that they “do their own research” on candidates and they “don’t let the negative campaign ads” or, for local candidates, negative mailers, influence them. And the advice being given by “experts” — whether it’s true, or when it’s being given out because it’s the best available advice to grassroots candidates — is to knock on doors. “Knock on doors,” they say, because if you’ve made a personal connection, that’ll cause voters to be skeptical of the negative mailers that come their way later.
But times have changed. Phone banking used to involve talking to real voters. Now it means leaving endless voice mail messages on phone numbers compiled by large data companies rather than the phone company. And fewer and fewer people open up the door, with fewer stay-at-home-moms, and with more screening of doorbells through cameras, and more reluctance to open the door at a time when it’s much less likely that it’s a neighbor, or, really, anyone with anything worthwhile to say, and when there’s much more fear that it’s a criminal.
And how do people actually get their news? So far as I can tell, mostly from sources that confirm what they already believe, and for younger voters, not necessarily even from traditional news at all, but from podcasts like Joe Rogan, or from TikTok or YouTube content creators that have established their trust.
Heck, even Facebook isn’t what it was. People used to share little bits and pieces of their lives. Now people use the “groups” in Facebook — but even there, actual conversations are decreasing, and community groups are more likely to be a stream of ads or business pages promoting their services or shares of angry comments about national politics. I’m told that people have shifted to watching reels, TikTok and other short videos rather than engaging with real people on social media.
And, again, you can’t even hope that people will read the paper to learn about the issues, let alone that you can achieve the goal of “earned media” — of newspaper reporting about your events or the statements you make. The local suburban Daily Herald has a policy: declared candidates for office cannot public an op-ed piece — but elected officials can do precisely that! The cards are stacked against challengers.
It’s a mess. Am I soldiering on and doing the best I can? You bet. But I sure wish that times were different.
Ad-Free & Subscriber Log-In