The following is from the Philadelphia Weekly, Broad Street Review, the Philadelphia Inquirer and Daily News.
The Philadelphia Weekly's, Steve Volk peels back the curtain a bit to expose, from many angles, the thoughts of those inside and outside the papers in regards to the situation and sale. Many are positive and looking forward to the future, but there are a few that have concerns that bear watching.
Giving voice to those concerns, from previous experience, is former Inquirer reporter Ralph Cipriano, who in an accompanying Philadelphia Weekly piece (scroll down) recalls his past experience with Philadelphia Media Holding's CEO Brian Tierney.
From the Inquirer, also recalling previous battles, is Monica Yant Kinney's must read eye opener.
From Broad Street Review, Dan Rottenberg takes us back to the time when the Inquirer and Daily News were last owned by local ownership, to remind us it wasn't all it was cracked up to be.
Mark Alan Hughes, in the Daily News, looks at this as an opportunity to shake of the shackles "forget the public trust hooey" and see some real competition between the papers:
I've never liked the idea that a single newspaper can be treated as a guardian of truth, justice and the American Way by simply repeating the mantra of "public trust, public trust" and blathering about civic journalism. Besides, it leads to lousy papers: No one wants to read a nonprofit newsletter.
But that's the problem of other cities, not Philadelphia. We still have two newspapers that, potentially, can compete with each other.
The Founders understood that the way to protect a republic from tyranny is with a free press, and that the way to protect a free press is with unfettered speech. Unless we're all identical robots, unfettered speech creates debate, a competitive marketplace of ideas.
Newspapers work as the agents of that marketplace, not as vestal virgins guarding some dying embers of truth.
OUR NEW owners should go beyond "permitting" competition between the Daily News and the Inquirer. They should engineer
it....I want two competing newspapers, either of which might win or lose on any given day, for the same reason I want two competing political parties, either of which might win or lose in any given election.
Nothing corrupts like a lack of competition. Values inculcate loyalty, and loyalty is what newspapers need to rekindle the habit of readership.
Lets hope Mark gets his wish.
philly.com
two competing newspapers under separate ownership? or same ownership. if they were completely separate entities, what would happen to philly.com? who would have control over which story got onto the front page and featured?
Post new comment