Leonard Downie and Robert Kaiser have written a book that describes what is wrong with American journalism. Those who have observed the media during the last 15 to 20 years have noted disturbing trends: 1. News that seems more like entertainment than real news; 2. A decline in the quality and quantity of real hard news stories in papers and t.v news.; 3. More stories about actors, sports figures, and celebrities; 4. News that seems more like a paid promotion by a corporation than news.

The authors tell us why this has occurred. Essentially, many newspapers, t.v. stations, and radio stations have been taken over by huge corporations like Gannett or AOL-Time Warner. These corporations are fixed upon obtaining a certain bottomline profit margin from each station year by year. To this end, they have limited space for hard news stories, laid off thousands of reporters, increased entertainment type features, and do little investigative reporting (which is expensive). They have also raised advertising rates and in some situations, involved themselves with inappropriate relationships with businesses who advertise in their mediums.

The authors point out through a number of examples, exactly why good journalism is important to a community. Solid news coverage on a state/national/international level has helped inform the American people of complex realities, enabling them to make sound decisions in the Representative Democracy in which we live. It has helped cracked scandals like Watergate wide open. It has helped states realize and rectify problems in their educational and social systems. It has explained much of the current problems with Muslims and Osama Bin Laden, so that we can understand what occurred on September 11, 2001 better.

The authors are wrong about some things. I noted that both Downie and Kaiser started in journalism in the sixties, before the advent of the computer age. Perhaps, this is what makes them hostile to presentation of news stories with fancy computer graphics, maps, and other audio/visual effects. I don't see this as a problem. I think an authoritative news cast could make use of both good reporting and the technologies of the information age that allow us to make better presentations and allow for more effective communication with an audience.

While I largely agree with the authors, I also note this problem. The term "news" and "newsworthy" is a very subjective term. Any two people may experience serious disagreement about what is a legitimate "news story" and what is not. For example, a president having sex with his intern may or not may not be a news story. Perhaps, the line is when you can show that his doing so is somehow interfering with his official duties. By arguing that the media needs to do a better job reporting news, and complaining about particular types of reporting,the authors in essence conclude that some matters are not "newsworthy". The authors opinion on this maybe no better or worse than our own.

What I found most discouraging about the book is that the solutions are going to be very difficult. Things have reached the point they have because of demands for profitability by huge multi-national corporations. Its a very involved process and will be difficult to rectify.

In the end, the authors simply make the point that if the American public wants good journalism it has the power to demand it, by refusing to watch or read poor journalism. That action will send the greatest message of all to those who are in charge.

Another book about how the quality of news is going down the tubes. Well-written and well researched, it blames the dumbing-down of news product on an ever-more-competitive scramble for high profits in the face of fragmenting readership.
Like other such books, it raises important questions that remain unanswered: Are people less interested in news because news is getting dumber... or is the news getting dumber because people have become less interested in news? Why don't news providers lose audience for dumbing down... and gain audience from raising the bar? Will we be empowered by new media and news-on-demand to demand (and get) good journalism, and avoid (and punish) bad journalism? Or will corporate consolidation continue to undermine standards for news in a race to the lowest common denominator? The authors detail the well-known condition of today's media. But what now?

If you read a newspaper, listen to the radio, or watch T.V. news, you MUST read this book. Kaiser and Downie, veterans journalists from the Washington Post, explain why our newspapers are the key to a vibrant, free press, and are the springboard for all other (read: electronic) types of journalism.

More importantly, the authors enlighten the readers to the deleterious effects of corporate ownership on newspapers. In an effort to maintain historically high profit margins - and therefore, stockholder equity - corporate influence causes newspapers large and small to trim news space, cut staff, and conform to cookie cutter reporting strategies. This book is a real eye-opener, and more than a little scary.