Arizona's Own Espresso Pundit

Seriously, who is going to report the news?

I touched a nerve last week when I quoted this piece of conventional wisdom and answered with a dismissive "whatever."

To produce news, you need professionals who understand the standards needed to research, report and write on what happened. If newspapers die, reliable information dries up.

From the tone of the comments and the concern expressed by friends who called, I've realized that this is a real concern.

There are a lot of people who believe that traditional reporters are the initial source of news while the "new" media simply repackage it.   I can see how folks get that impression, but it's not accurate.  So let me tell you how the news actually works now and how I think it will work in the future.

The first principle that we must remember is that even at peak of daily newspaper readership, we all segmented our news.  Some people subscribed just for the sports page, business, politics, lifestyle or even just for the weather.  My sister in law subscribed to the Republic for the Soduku puzzle; my dad gets the Citizen for the golf coupons. Very few people are interested in all the sections.

Now when we segment our news, we are able to get a lot of it from the original sources.  Some of this is obvious.  You don't need a reporter to give you the weather, movie times or financial statistics.  But some of it is not so obvious.  There is a tremendous amount of news that comes straight from the sources and we customize that news into our own baskets.

In order to show how it works, let me show you my news basket.  My basket is customized to my needs and it provides me a tremendous amount of information that was never available from traditional newspapers.  You may not like my basket and it certainly won't meet your needs, but that's because I've tailored it to meet my needs.  When the reporters are gone, you will build your own basket. 

Here's what my news basket looks like:

Originators:

As recently as 15 years ago, if you wanted to know what, say, the Avondale City Council was doing, you needed to either go down and to city hall and get an agenda, or try to find coverage in your local paper.  The Republic would try to meet this need by providing a zone section and the little independent papers--like the Arcadia News for example--would fill in the gaps with detailed coverage. 

Now however, you can sign up to get all the agenda information directly from the source.  I follow the Corporation Commission, CAWCD, DEQ and DWR very closely, so I'm on all of their direct distribution lists.  That means that when the ACC calls a Special Open Meeting, DWR puts out its Legislative Agenda , or  DEQ expresses concern about its budget, I know about it immediately. I'm on dozens of these lists.

Spinners:

The automated announcements are efficient, but sometimes they lack context.  That's why I signed up for the press release distribution lists for the agencies and events that I follow.  So when Governor Brewer announces her appointment to the  Department of Weights Measures, or Maricopa County announces the results of the latest RAND study on Meth use, I get copies as soon as the Republic reporters do.  The mainstream papers will then dutifully follow up, and here.   

Accumulators:

Some issues that I care about aren't on my immediate radar, so I rely on interested parties who each have their own agendas and want to get their message out.  Brenda at Children's Action Alliance has an important perspective, as does Diane from Arizona PIRG, as well as Glenn Hamer from the AZ Chamber plus Tom Jenny from AFP  as well as Steve Voeller.  I'm also signed up for updates from the Republican side of our Congressional delegation plus a handful of other organizations that provide original content.  Sure, all of them have a perspective, but so do the papers.  I think I'm much better off without the journalistic gatekeeper to tell me what's important. 

Notice that all of those sources are passive?  They are automatically emailed to me and none of them involve traditional reporters.

In addition to relying on accumulators, I serve as an accumulator.  One of the commenter's complained that I don't write any original news, I simply comment on items in the papers.  That's because most of my original content is too specialized to put into Espresso Pundit, but here is an example of  news coverage that I supply to clients.

 My National Basket

Obviously I need a source for national news as well, and as you might imagine, my national basket leans towards politics, economics and law.   For pure economic news, I rely on Marginal Revolution; for law, I read the Volokh Conspiracy and for an interesting perspective on national politics, I read Powerline.  Of course, these sites often comment on mainstream sources, but they also use original material from government economic data or court cases. 

The most important part of anyone's national news basket is a good general accumulator.  I get most of my general news from Instapundit. Glenn Reynolds is a law professor who scours thousands of sources and provides a quick summary and link to scores of interesting articles each day.  Some of them are from Mainstream sources, but most of the articles are from non-mainstream sources.

Mainstream Sources

To be sure, some of my news comes from mainstream sources.  I subscribe to the Republic, Capitol Times and Wall Street Journal and I follow Sonoran Alliance, R Cubed and Political Arizona which often (like espresso pundit) refer to mainstream media stories.  The Drudge Report is a great accumulator site, but almost all of his sources are from the Mainstream.

So what happens when the newspapers go away?  They will be replaced by thousands of original sources who will distribute raw content as well as the spinners, monitors and accumulators who work to provide context to that content. 

The readers will customize their own baskets by signing up for content that will be sent directly to them, and frankly, they will be much better off.  I'm much better informed than I was even a few years ago. 

With source documents being automatically emailed to me, a large network of self interested accumulators keeping me informed about issues, not to mention programs like Google Alerts that scour the web for key words that I've requested, I have no need for someone at a mainstream newspaper to screen information for me. 

Who will write the news when the newspapers are gone?  You will.  I will.  Glenn Hamer, Tom Jenny, Brenda, Diane and Steve Voeller will.  So will Jeff Flake, Harry Mitchell, Laura Devany, Shane Wikfors, David Schweikert and Kyrsten Sinema.

We will all be reading the news as well...in real time, from original sources.  We won't have Walter Cronkite, Dan Rather, Kevin Willey or John Zidich deciding what we should read or how we should think. 

We've overcome that, and we are much better off. 

 

 

I guess they didn't get the memo.

Todd Dorman, a columnist for the Ceder Rapids Gazette, shares his opinion about DHS Secretary Napolitano's recent trip to his flood-ravaged state. 

I was not much impressed by the U.S. Homeland Security chief's visit to our flooded homeland this past week. Sure, I understand Janet Napolitano is new to the job, which includes overseeing FEMA, and has a tight schedule. I appreciate the time she took to stop by.

But I would have appreciated it more if she had directed her sizable SUV caravan into a flooded neighborhood.

Dude, Napolitano is off limits to media criticism.  Didn't he get the memo?

Through the Looking Glass.

Ok, that's the last time I take a week off.  So I'm reading New Times and Sarah Fenske is quoting Ronald Reagan and complaining that the state budget grew too fast.  Where am I?

In hindsight, it's clear that rather than saving up for an inevitable downturn — or even just holding out for truly worthy programs — the state went on a spending spree.

From fiscal year 2003 to 2007, general fund expenditures in Arizona increased by nearly 70 percent — from $6 billion to $10.2 billion. Sure, the state was adding residents every day, but even when you factor that in and account for inflation, state spending was still through the roof. Over those four years, spending rose at an average of 8 percent annually, even when adjusted for both population growth and inflation. (Those figures come from the non-partisan Joint Legislative Budget Committee, in case you were wondering.) How many households do you think were able to raise their spending at a similar clip?

Of course, many worthy programs were funded during that time. But Ronald Reagan had it right when he wrote, "Government always finds a need for whatever money it gets."

So I'm gone a week and like 5 newspapers go under...

Where to begin? 

I take a week off and I can't even keep up with the collapse of the dead tree media. 

Gannett cut its dividend by 90%, and then Moody's cut Gannett's bond rating to junk.  GCI Stock continued its collapse and is now trading at $3.57 a share--down another 5% today alone.  It's been nearly a year since I pointed out that the stock was collapsing.  I called that post "Never Trust Anyone Under 30."  Since then the stock has fallen nearly 90%.

Real Clear Politics has a good summary of recent industry news that includes a list of the Top 10 Newspapers in trouble. 

The Seattle Post-Intelligencer, Rocky Mountain News and Tucson Citizen all might not see April Fools Day. Then yesterday, the San Francisco Chronicle hinted that it could be going away soon as well. Even the Washington Post, one of the most stable papers, reported a 77% drop in earnings in the fourth quarter of 2008. In todays gloomy newspaper landscape, no one is safe.

But who will make the Buggy whips?

Meanwhile, the legacy journalists continue their lament that without newspapers, there will no longer be actual news.

To produce news, you need professionals who understand the standards needed to research, report and write on what happened. If newspapers die, reliable information dries up.

Whatever.

Finally, the folks at "the Arizona Guardian" no longer have press credentials because they, like you know, no longer work at a newspaper.  That means that they don't enjoy special access to the secure areas of the House and Senate and it also means that they can't rent space in the press room.  

Intent on turning the Press Room into a Woolworth's counter, they have decided to squat there despite not having a lease and being told to leave. 

Dude, who do you guys think is the Senate President now?  Fun loving, music playing, Softball champion Ken Bennett has moved on.  Crying on the Senate floor, press fawning Randall Gnant has moved to Arkansas.  Black Heart Bob Burns runs the Senate now, so when those really big guys from DPS show up, better have your stuff in a box that's easy to carry and remember the phrase that pays.

Sorry about the lack of posts.

I've been completely snowed under this week but have you noticed that the newspaper industry is collapsing?  If not, I'll be sure to mention it when I'm done taking the bar.  

I thought about blogging during the lunch break in the Multistate, but I have a conference call during that time, so I'll catch up with espresso pundit tonight.

Meanwhile, here are some interesting Transmission Presentations. 

Download ACC BTA Order 70635 - Intro Presenation 042009 - Final

Download ACC BTA Order Workshop April 2009 - Planning Overview - Kondziolka - 4.16.09

Download BJA BTA Renewable Trans Workshop Planning Background 04172009

Download Ed Beck Regulatory Process - 2

Download Finance Sub_Workshop (4-20-09)

The First Step is to Admit that You have a Problem.

It looks like the Arizona Daily Star has had a breakthrough on Rio Nuevo.  For years the Star has resorted to name calling and blame shifting by claiming that any skepticism the Legislature shows to the Rio Nuevo project results from ideology and regional prejudice.  The most recent example occurred this week.

The Republican ideologues calling the shots at the Legislature could cut Rio Nuevo off at the knees.

 Here's an example from last January

These could be perilous times for Southern Arizona when the state's Maricopa County-dominated, Republican-majority Legislature opens Monday.

Southern Arizona's largely Democratic delegation will have little clout on legislative committees and perhaps even less leverage with the Legislature's conservative GOP leaders.
What's at risk?

● Add to that lawmakers' threats to withdraw funds from Tucson's special Downtown redevelopment district, Rio Nuevo, after the Star reported its spending could not fully or transparently be accounted for.

Here's the Star from May of 2006.

...there remains a problem with members of the Legislature who are trapped by their own provincial myopia, men and women who rarely venture beyond the Phoenix metro area and who seem to believe that if a community is not within the urbanized center of Maricopa County it simply isn't worth talking about.

If the community happens to be in Southern Arizona, where Democrats outnumber Republicans , there is all the more reason for Republican -dominated Maricopa County to ignore it.

We cannot see that there is any other reasonable explanation for the reluctance of the Legislature to approve the Tucson TIF bill.

Really? The Star can't see any other reasonable explanations other than myopia, ideology, provincialism and Maricopa County Republican domination? 

Well the first step in any recovery program is to admit that you have a problem and the next step is to stop blaming others.  It looks like the Star is making remarkable progress. 

This morning's editorial recognized  Rio Nuevo's shortcomings without resorting to name calling or blame shifting. 

Thus, Rio Nuevo had $60 million over 10 years with no real plan or vision. Costly, pie-in-the-sky projects such as an aquarium and the Rainbow Bridge that would have arched over Interstate-10 with the science center extending from it were on the drawing board.

The editorial board has even made enough progress that it recognizes that if the project can't be fixed, the myopic, territorial, ideological, Maricopa County Republican-dominated Legislature is right to shut it down.

But at this point Rio Nuevo is on life support. The mayor and council must exert real leadership — making a solid case to the Legislature and the public for the district's continuance; making transparency and accountability a priority; generating private-sector investment; and setting aside petty differences and pet projects for the greater good.

 

Otherwise, pull the plug..

 

So, maybe the Legislative skeptics were right after all?  Wow, that's progress. 

You didn't actually think it was spontaneous did you?

We've all read the stories of thousands of people descending on the Capitol in support of education funding.  Have you ever wondered how those demonstrations are organized?  Naturally, they use school resources and school logistics. 

Here's an efficient little announcement from the Cocopah Junior High website.

March 4 Schools Event at the Arizona State Capitol

Supporters of public education will gather at the Arizona State Capitol on Wednesday, March 4th to make their concerns heard regarding proposed budget cuts to education. The Arizona State Legislature is proposing 18 percent cuts to public education statewide. Budget cuts proposed for Scottsdale Unified School District total $21 million. Buses will leave from 10 different Scottsdale Unified School District sites at 3:45 pm and return at 6:00 pm. These sites are; Anasazi, ANLC, Aztec, Cochise, Copper Ridge, Hohokam, Pueblo, Sequoya, Tavan, and Tonalea. Each site will also offer carpools as needed. The community is invited to attend this important event.
 
Please RSVP at:
http://www.surveymonkey.com/

Wow, busses from 10 different schools.  I wonder who is paying for all that?

Here's a nice organizational touch.  I can't tell if this blast is set up using a school distribution network or not, but it looks to me like the only way to get these email addresses would be to get them from the school itself. 

-----Original Message-----

From: sophomores2008-bounces@chapts.org

[mailto:sophomores2008-bounces@chapts.org] On Behalf Of sophomores2008@chapts.org

Sent: Wednesday, February 18, 2009 9:59 AM

To: freshmen2008@chapts.org; sophomores2008@chapts.org; Juniors2008@chapts.org; Seniors2008@chapts.org

Subject: Chapts Sophomores2008 March 4th rally at State Capitol

Please see below regarding a rally at the State Capitol:

March 4 Schools 4:00 - 6:00 at the Arizona State Capitol

We need everyone at this event. Buses are leaving from 10 different elementary schools (departing at 3:45). Please use this link to RSVP.

http://www.surveymonkey.com

  

Pass this email on to anyone, I mean anyone, who believes that a promising tomorrow starts with our schools today. Right now the legislative leadership is proposing cuts of 18% to our already inadequate funding.

My promise is to speak up against this. Will you? I mean really...what's it gonna take?

PTOs and PTAs, I implore you to get this through your network with a real sense of urgency.

 

No More Star in the South

While I've been focusing on the editorial side of the major newspapers there are some financial updates that you should be aware of.  Last July I reported that Lee Enterprises--which owns the Daily Star--was in the midst of a financial collapse.  By that time, I had covered the demise of the newspaper industry for years and my skeptical friends used to point out that the papers weren't actually going to go away.  They aren't saying that any more.

Here's what I wrote last July. 

I've trumpeted the industry's collapse for several years, however, this last month has the look of a tipping point; the business model is untenable and there will be no capital infusion. 

Since then, Lee Enterprises' stock has collapsed--and it was down another 10% today.  In the last 5 years, the stock has gone from nearly $50 a share to nearly zero.  Check out this astonishing chart; that's what a 99.38% loss looks like.  Pretty soon the Lee Enterprises will be de-listed and we won't even be able to look it up. 

The Star is an ice cube on the kitchen counter.  Sure, it still has some substance left, but its demise is inevitable.  It will soon be just a little puddle and eventually a hard water stain.  But the point is that it's over. 

The demise is  unfortunate, after all, there is actually some talent on the news side.  Of course, most people don't appreciate the quality of the reporting  because it's always being undercut by the hapless editorial board. 

Could the story have been different?  I've argued that a paper is generally known by its editorial stances.  The Star has been reflexively liberal, but you can only go so far by pandering to fraction of the population who describe themselves as liberal...even in Tucson.  The vapid arguments, ad hominem attacks and obvious ignorance of the issues will eventually turn off even the most devoted liberal reader.  

The Star will still exist for a while, but it's in a winding down phase.  It will continue to cut costs in an attempt to chase falling revenue, but it will eventually need a cash infusion for a new press or for deferred maintenance costs and that cash won't be there.  A thousand fortunes have been lost on the Star in the last five years.  A thousand is enough.  It's over.   

See. See Jane. See Jane Write. Jane See White.

I've been pointing out that many of the editorials in the state's largest newspapers read like high school essays.   Some of them However, use techniques that every elementary student knows are wrong.   Even kids who barely got though Dick and Jane books understand that you can't just make stuff up.  The MSN needs to learn this lesson as well.

Here's a great example from an editorial in favor of Rio Nuevo in Friday's Arizona Daily Star.  The Star is trying to argue that the tax structure that established Rio Nuevo is common and eleminating it would be an example of "Republican ideologues" in the Legislature unfairly targeting Tucson.

There are "hundreds" of similar deals draining cash from the state's general fund, according to Kevin McCarthy, president of the Arizona Tax Research Association in Phoenix.

That statement is absurd; there are exactly four similar deals:  Rio Nuevo, Tribal Community Colleges, the TSA and the Michael Preston Green Gila River Crossing at PIR.  

ATRA meets every Friday, so we asked Kevin about this absurd statement and he assured us that he talked to Star Editorial writer Jane See White and explained the projects.  It's hard to imagine that White could simply get it that wrong...especially since the one word that is wrong, is the one word that is in quotes. 

But "four" doesn't fit the narrative that the Star is selling.  If you want to claim that the evil Republicans in the legislature are picking on Tucson, it's much more effective to argue that there are "hundreds" of similar deals--and if you can make your point by misquoting someone as credible as Kevin McCarthy, so much the better.

So what's the real story?  Why the need to claim there are "hundreds" of similar projects?  White touches on the problem in the editorial.

We understand her frustration. The Star has reported on confusing, inadequate financial information provided by Rio Nuevo.

And there's certainly been too much waste and too little progress in the 10 years since Tucson voters approved Rio Nuevo.

Indeed.  The Star is the victim of its own investigation.

While the Star Editorial Board tries to shift the blame to Maricopa County Republicans for the potential demise of Rio Nuevo, the real story is much more interesting and ironic.  The reason that the patience for Rio Nuevo is gone is that the Star's Rob O'Dell presented a devastating series of front page articles about what a waste Rio Nuevo has been.  

Check out this opening.

In the nine years since voters approved the Rio Nuevo Downtown redevelopment district, the city has taken in — and spent — more than $77 million in taxpayer money.

That almost matches the $80 million voters were told to expect the city to put toward an array of museums, a re-creation of Tucson's birthplace and a Downtown hotel.

But with that much money spent — and just $28,000 in the bank as of June 1 — none of those jewels of the Rio Nuevo plan is even close to starting construction.

Ouch.  I'm mean seriously, how can the state lay off a couple thousand workers and at the same time continue to justify pumping millions dollars into Rio Nuevo?

The Editorial Board is left to try to argue that even though the project has wasted millions of dollars, progress has been virtually non existent and the accounting is at best opaque, shutting it down would be unfair because there are "hundreds" of similar projects.  So the real reason is that the Ultra Conservative Troglodyte Maricopa County Republicans are shutting it down is not because of Rob O'Dell's reporting; they are shutting it down because they don't like Tucson.

All the Star needs in order to make that argument is someone credible like Kevin McCarthy to point out that there are "hundreds" of similar projects.  Too bad she had to make up that number.

Post Script:

Actually, the number isn't even four;  Rio Nuevo is unique.  I have to take a moment and dispel a myth that Rio Nuevo supporters have been foisting for years.  Here's how Tedski described it in R Cubed.

Folks can take issue with the way the money has been spent, but this statement demonstrates an ignorance of how TIF financing actually works. This is revenue that the state would not be getting if the district didn’t exist.

Actually, that's the way that TIF financing is SUPPOSED to work.  The theory is simple, build a project that otherwise wouldn't exist and finance the project by using some of the sales tax that the project brings in.  That's why it's called Tax INCREMENT Financing. 

But the Rio Nuevo folks pulled a fast one from the very beginning.  Have you ever seen the Rio Nuevo map?   One glance and you will figure out the trick. 

The bubble at the left is what we traditionally view as the Rio Nuevo development area.  When project supporters set up the district, they gerrymandered the map so that it would pick up the Elcon and Park Place malls.  This trick allowed the city to siphon off sales tax money that was supposed to go to the state and obviously had nothing to do with "incremental" tax revenue. 

While there are a few projects that rely on TIF, there are no projects that have abused the program like Tucson.  Not only has the Rio Nuevo money been wasted, much of it was never intended to be part of the project in the first place.

But he's been so...useful.

Here's an interesting development.

Four Democratic U.S. House members are calling for the new Attorney General and Homeland Security Secretary to investigate allegations of racial profiling against Maricopa County Sheriff Joe Arpaio.

So wouldn't that be a conflict?  After all Governor Napolitano and Sheriff Arpaio enjoy a special relationship. 

Here's how the Republic's Richard Ruelas covered the situation in October of 2002

On her last day as the U.S. attorney for Arizona, Janet Napolitano did Sheriff Joe Arpaio a favor. Now, five years later, he has paid her back.

Arpaio has taken to the airwaves to defend Napolitano 's record. "As U.S. attorney, she was the Number One prosecutor of child molesters in the nation," the ad says.

Ruelas believes that the commercial was payback for Napolitano letting Arpaio of the hook in when she was US Attorney.

In 1997, she decided not to pursue civil rights charges against Arpaio , despite documenting abuse in his jails. She ended the two-year investigation with a lawsuit and settlement she described as "lawerly paperwork."

Since Napolitano won her initial election by around 11,000 votes, it's easy to credit Arpaio with her victory.  And while in office, her position on immigration evolved from her supporting driver licenses for illegal aliens in the begining of her administration, to calling for an employer sanctions law and putting troops o the border by the end of her administration.

She brilliantly parlayed her hardline immigration approach into a cabinet position while managing to convince local Democrats that she was on their side.  Now, as the former members of her administration are emptying their desks into cardboard boxes and the local Democratic establishment is in chaos, national Democrats are asking for Janet to investigate Arpaio.   

They don't understand that Arpaio was responsible for her victory in 2002 and that her adoption of his militaristic approach to immigration enforcement was responsible for her ascension to a cabinet post six years later.  Investigate Arpaio?  Fat chance.

(Of course, there is long line of unemployed Arizona Democrats who will argue that loyalty is a one way street with Napolitano and her support evaporates as soon as the recipient of that support is no longer useful.  Since Napolitano's unlikely to ever return to Arizona except for photo opts or layovers, she may throw Joe under the bus just to impress the folks in Washington.)