I did a double take when I read that Olympian Publisher George Le Masurier serves as the board chair of the Washington Center for the Performing Arts. This was disclosed at the top of a Feb. 5 opinion piece by Le Masurier titled, “Investment in performing arts center is money wisely spent.”
In that essay Le Masurier provides some useful historical background, but he does so within the context of calling for continued governmental support for the center despite recent budget troubles and questions about its management.
What was most surprising was that no one on the comment thread mentioned the 800-pound gorilla sitting in the living room: Why is the publisher of the local monopoly daily news outlet using his journalistic power to further the agenda of a controversial outside organization?
This is a conflict of interest.
The Society of Professional Journalists’ code of ethics states that journalists should “avoid conflicts of interests, real or perceived” by, for example, shunning “service in community organizations if they compromise journalistic integrity.” The code also calls on journalists to encourage “the public to voice grievances against the news media” and admit “mistakes and correct them promptly.”
We shouldn’t even have to argue about whether sitting on the Washington Center’s board compromises The Olympian’s journalistic integrity. As I’ve discussed previously, The Olympian maintains a remarkably complete monopoly on local news coverage. This heightens the need for newspaper staff to not mix journalism and politics. But that’s exactly what Le Masurier has done.
It’s not as though the center is some innocuous, feel-good community service akin to the Pet Parade. The City of Olympia owns the Washington Center’s main facility. As The Olympian has reported — and George Le Masurier has lauded — a multi-million dollar renovation is currently being considered by the city. These decisions are being made under the cloud of Washington Center budget deficits.
Last December Kevin Boyer, the center’s interim executive director, told the Olympia City Council that it would have to close in January without a new source of funds. The Olympian reported that the council voted to allow the center to tap into $200,000 from its endowment fund “to stabilize its operations.”
How bad are things at the Washington Center? It’s hard to tell from reading Olympian stories. But I wouldn’t be surprised if this is not the last time the center asks for a bailout. Just as significantly, I suspect that the center’s current troubles are at least partially the result of management missteps by the previous executive director, Tom Iovanne. The public has a right to know what happened. Can we expect The Olympian to really dig into that story given Le Masurier’s role as board chair?
Indeed, can we even expect robust reporting from The Olympian about the Washington Center’s programming priorities? Ken Balsley, one of the few alternative sources of journalism in Thurston County, has criticized the center “as an elitist organization that’s more concerned with bringing culture to this backwater community than it is to providing entertainment the unwashed masses want to see.” Balsley argues that this has exacerbated the center’s recession-induced financial troubles.
You don’t have to agree with Balsley to recognize that the Washington Center is an important news story that isn’t likely to go away any time soon. Alas, The Olympian’s readers can never be sure how coverage — or lack thereof — has been influenced by Le Masurier’s involvement with the Washington Center.
The Olympian’s own ethics code states, “We serve the public best by fiercely protecting our independence and reputation. We do not engage in outside activities that could conflict with our duty to the public or lessen the value of our services to The Olympian.”
If those aren’t just empty words then George Le Masurier needs to do the right thing. He should resign from the Washington Center’s board.
POSTSCRIPT: If we had more journalistic competition in this town a wayward pajama blogger need not have bothered writing this post. This is why I harp so much on the dangers of media monopolies. The great journalism critic A. J. Liebling said it best: “A city with one newspaper . . . is like a man with one eye, and often the eye is glass. . . . It is not right that a citizen’s access to news should be completely aleatory, depending on the character of the monopoly publisher in the city where he happens to live.”
RE:SOURCES
Liebling, A. J. 1981. The Press. New York: Pantheon Books.
tom hyde
April 15, 2012
Well that is an interesting ethical dilemma but I’m not sure it’s as black and white as you make it appear.
First, there is a long tradition of publishers (who were once often synonymous with “owner” before the consolidation of newspaper ownership into a small group of national corporations) acting as the face of the newspaper in civic organizations. Too, publishers often act more as business managers than editors and are more often than not fairly hands off when it comes to day to day news decisions. This is akin to the question of whether publishers should sit of Chamber of Commerce boards, or act as board presidents. And Le Masurier did disclose his role in his opinion piece so he is consistent with the newspaper’s ethics code, in one sense. So I’m of two minds on this despite your assertion that this ethical conflict shouldn’t even be up for debate. While he certainly is the “boss” at The Olympian, isn’t serving on the board of an arts facility just the kind of classic community service you’d expect from the local daily’s publisher? That the community facility is now controversial is another issue. Your assertion of shallow coverage by The Olympian is fair, especially in light of potential substantial public expenditures in this time of shrinking budgets. So certainly, the publisher has put himself in a bit of a bind when it comes to appearances but is his resignation really necessary?
In a broader sense, I also see the need for newspapers to become more engaged with the community and civics in general. As it is now, it seems able to engage mostly the angry disenfranchised mean-spirited in its online forum (a national trend with newspapers) which might be an indication of the newspaper’s overall inability to remain relevant in the community, or to foster reasoned debate.
So this is an interesting discussion in the context of how newspaper’s can remain relevant and reengage a precipitously declining readership (among those under 50) while maintaining journalistic integrity. Can newspapers afford to continue to be the seemingly creepy guy standing alone at the back of the room, or do they need to redefine how they engage as members of the community? And while we’re at it, does “journalistic integrity” in the traditional J-school sense need to ammended? Has it been already? I have no idea but it’s fun to chew on. Thanks for the usual thought provoking post.
olympiaviews
April 15, 2012
Tom, it would be less clear-cut if The Olympian’s publisher functioned purely as a business manager. But he doesn’t — the guy writes his own column, which often takes issue stances.
In addition, if the publisher wished to show some separation between his editorial and community service roles he could have steered clear of opining about the Washington Center. Instead he inserts himself right smack in the middle of this controversy.
That’s a particularly powerful signal (e.g., to local elected officials who must vote on Washington Center funding) given the history of The Olympian’s op-ed section in this all-too-small town.
What does “engagement” look like in your brave new world? A return to yellow journalism, when it was considered normal for a publisher to exercise a heavy hand in local politics?
Instead of joining boards, why can’t The Olympian’s publisher focus on convening community-wide conversations? Like by sponsoring summits on local issues, teaching courses at local colleges or even participating in blogs. There are lots of ways to reach out that don’t compromise a newspaper’s journalistic role.
But put aside conflict-of-interest concerns for a minute. If the publisher sought to develop some street cred with folks under 30, I don’t think the Washington Center is the right vehicle because its programming isn’t tilted toward that demographic. Indeed, that’s part of the controversy: http://www.washingtoncenter.org/upcoming-events/
tom hyde
April 15, 2012
Well, certainly the publisher writes a column … but as opinion, which by its nature is not objective, and doesn’t even have to be fair, and to be fair, a good newspaper is, or should be, a leader in the community through its opinion page, for good or ill, depending on your personal perspective. That is, and always has been, the prerogative of the publisher. The editorial board is NOT in the newsroom, and neither is the advertising department. For all its issues, I do believe The Olympian is very good about drawing clear lines, building thick walls, between these departments … even if 95 percent of the public doesn’t believe, or isn’t even aware, of that policy.
That he could, or should, have steered clear of opining about a center on which he serves as board chair … perhaps that would have been wise. But he did clearly disclose, at the top of the column, his role and, again, its opinion, not news.
So newspapers, through their editorial page, shouldn’t send clear signals to the local elected officials, or the electorate? What if this was a call for more low income housing? Isn’t that what editorials are for?
Oh c’mon D. Lemming, the “return to yellow journalism” quip was unnecessarily provactive. You do know me better than that. Been reading too much of the keyboard fighting brigade lately?
)
No, certainly not. There are many opportunities for the newspaper to do what it an ideal world it should be doing in the first place – acting as a nexus between the elected and the electorate and in my own naive, ideal world, comforting the afflicted and afflicting the comfortable.
Your idea (added while I was typing this?) regarding community forums is exactly the kind of thing I had in mind.
tom hyde
April 15, 2012
I have to remember not to type smilies in here ’cause they turn into those god awful tacky graphics. Uhhm, you can turn those off in your wordpress control panel btw
olympiaviews
April 15, 2012
Yeah, I fleshed out my thinking while you were typing. I’ve got an edit button.
I bring up yellow journalism in a way that is more descriptive than you may have taken it. All too often new trends — be they in journalism or other fields — are spoken of by their champions as though the lessons of history no longer apply.
Sometimes they don’t. But sometimes they do. Wisdom represents the ability to figure out what’s real and what’s wishful thinking. That wisdom is often hard won.
The bottom line for me is that the publisher violated his newspaper’s own ethics code. And in doing so he 1) set a bad example to lower-level staff and 2) may have created a chilling effect on robust news coverage of the Washington Center. That may have been entirely unintentional, but given continuing budgetary pressures at The Olympian, why wouldn’t reporters and editors tread lightly? You know how organizational politics works.
I’d also submit that there’s a meaningful difference between a publisher pontificating on an issue in the abstract as opposed to taking a stance that aligns with his role on a nonprofit board. He is legally responsible for his actions as a board member. Thus, he is more invested in the outcome of policy debates. Savvy elected officials understand this. More chilling effect.
BTW, I must admit that I don’t know how to make a smilie face. Should I feel old?
tom hyde
April 15, 2012
Now why can’t people have a reasonable discussion like that on sites like The Olympian’s? I find the sound bite drive by’s there so strange, pointless and self replicating. It makes the author seem so ignorant. Weird. Isn’t it The New York Times that now requires a facebook account to post? Not a fan of that but I understand the strategy to combat the vile comments.
I’ll admit though, I’m sometimes tempted to open a response here with “D. Lemming, you ignorant slut.” Does that make me seem old? I wonder how many people know that old line.
olympiaviews
April 15, 2012
Well, The Olympian is the newspaper equivalent of McDonald’s. Recall Tammy McGee saying that she reviewed 300 flagged comments in one day. As a point of reference, today only two of yours were flagged. Plenty of time to do the dishes.