Journalism in Defense of the Status Quo

Philip Eil, the news editor from the Providence Phoenix gives a good framework in which to consider Randal Edgar’s front-page story in today’s Providence Journal, Shaping R.I. public policy anonymously,” about the RI Center for Freedom & Prosperity (for which I work). Asks Eil, “isn’t it a journalist’s job to cover folks/orgs who are ‘disrupting the status quo,'” to which I reply: cover, yes, mislead about and attempt to isolate and discredit, no.

“Misleading” is really the most accurate term for the Projo headline (although “lying” would probably come close). As a factual matter, the actual people  “shaping R.I. public policy” via the Center are not at all anonymous. Check the organization’s “About Us” page. Every single person who has the authority and responsibility to select policies, publish research, or develop messaging is identified and from Rhode Island.

At bottom, Edgar’s article doesn’t really show any interest in the actual organization of the RI Center for Freedom & Prosperity. When he writes that the Center “operates largely in secret,” he doesn’t mean the way in which we actually, you know, operate. He doesn’t mean how we do the work that we do. He doesn’t mean the principles that guide our decisions. He means that we don’t expose our donors to unjustified scrutiny by government agencies or targeted local and national attacks from by-any-means-necessary progressive activists.

If this is supposed to be coverage, to better inform the people of Rhode Island about a relatively new group that’s managing to have some effect on public policy in the state, it appears that the only detail the Projo believes is relevant is our funding mechanism.

I think that’s completely backwards; one should assess a policy proposal or argument, first, the people who are doing the work, second, then look to funding and other sources of ulterior motives, last, if there appear to be inconsistencies. If one of the founding contributors of Anchor Rising, the state’s leading conservative blog, had taken a job putting out research more in keeping with the Poverty Institute or the AFL-CIO, then it would be reasonable to wonder what was going on.

Maybe that’s just my peculiar understanding of how we ought to seek and understand corruption.  But at the very least, everybody should agree that, for a well-informed public, funding isn’t the only thing that’s important to know about people on the stage.

For a study in contrasts, check out this glowing, romanticized profile of labor leader George Nee that the Providence Journal published in 2008. When you’re one of the archetypal Rhode Island insiders, directly making policy decisions on appointed government boards and wielding the massive resources of the state’s largest labor union, the Projo wants its readers to know that you think of your movement “like the patriots in the American Revolution.”

When you’re a tiny, local operation trying to break up the deadly monotony of a struggling state’s horrid policies, the pressing question to which Projo readers need an answer is whether a left-wing U.S. Senator was correct that you’re a “phony organization” and whether you can “categorically answer ‘no’ to the question about whether or not [your organization is] largely funded by Charles Koch, or any out-of-state wealthy individuals.”

In some respects, it’s difficult to understand why Rhode Island’s paper of record — with declining circulation and ad revenue — wouldn’t try to play up groups that might create conflict, enliven public policy battles, and give readers a reason to follow the news.  Of course, knowing the near-secret that Providence Journal reporters are unionized under Nee’s AFL-CIO helps one begin to form an explanation.

I’m not alleging overt spin on behalf of the journalists’ union and its progressive causes, but it does serve to illustrate a point about which Rhode Islanders definitely should be better informed: The Providence Journal is an integral part of the state’s insider culture.  Outsiders — even if local, even if pure — disrupt that status quo, and who knows where it might leave the Ocean State’s long-established news daily as the world changes (for the better) and new alliances form.

Disclaimer: The views and opinions expressed in The Ocean State Current, including text, graphics, images, and information are solely those of the authors. They do not purport to reflect the views and opinions of The Current, the RI Center for Freedom & Prosperity, or its members or staff. The Current cannot be held responsible for information posted or provided by third-party sources. Readers are encouraged to fact check any information on this web site with other sources.

YOUR CART
  • No products in the cart.
0