Hell Raised In Print, Regularly And Without Qualms

A recent letter to the editor from an unhappy doctor prompted me to sit down and try to articulate what it is a newspaper ought to be doing.

That’s a good exercise. Too often, like most of you who work hard and stay ridiculously busy, I simply go about doing the job I’m paid to do without much time for introspection. Besides, you readers deserve to have a notion of what I believe our mission as a small daily newspaper ought to be.

The doctor was unhappy with a recent series we published on how some physicians make a lot of money off of Medicare. This doctor was not a part of the series. The series, while interesting and fairly informative, didn’t contain any allegations of corruption or improprieties. Still, that didn’t prevent the good doctor from saying he resented the “muckraking” approach of our small daily newspaper.

He used the term like some folks use “politician,” as an insult or slur. He said all we were trying to do was sell newspapers.

“Muckraking” is defined as “searching for and publicizing, as in newspapers, any real or alleged corruption by public officials, business executives, or other important persons.”

I don’t consider muckraking to be a dirty word. Any editor worthy of the title ought to be proud to be called a muckraker.

Look at the definition again: Searching for and publicizing corruption. If that is not part of a newspaper’s job, then whose job is it? If we don’t do it, who will?

I wonder if readers really want a newspaper that ignores corruption, that doesn’t try to explain complicated issues, that doesn’t “print the news and raise hell.” The latter is what one paper proudly claimed as its slogan when muckrakers got their start by investigating the horrible conditions in sweatshops, where children were chained to their machines for 12 hours a day.

I think it’s a good slogan for a newspaper that cares about its community.

I have two goals as editor and publisher of a small daily newspaper. I must make a profit, because without that we won’t exist. And I must put out the best newspaper I can for our readers and advertisers.

I believe the two are absolutely connected. Fortunately, the folks I work for believe the same thing. You can put out a newspaper that doesn’t offend anybody, that doesn’t make anyone mad, and that shies away from controversial issues. Some companies do put out those kinds of newspapers. We don’t, because we believe lousy newspapers don’t make a profit. If I put out that kind of newspaper, which is hardly worthy of the name, my employers would find someone else to run this operation.

What does putting out a good newspaper mean to me?

Getting in every piece of local news we can get our hands on, from notices of church revivals to photos of club officers, to police reports and coverage of government meetings.

Publishing both good news and bad, without playing favorites.

Trying to be as fair and factual as we can be in a business that is constantly fraught with errors that stay in print forever for all to see.

“Comforting the afflicted and afflicting the comfortable,” as one writer once put it.

Celebrating our town’s triumphs and pointing out its shortcomings.

And on occasion, it means printing the news and raising hell.

How good of a job do we do? Ultimately, that’s for readers to decide. People vote for or against politicians at the polls. People vote for or against a newspaper by plunking down their money to pay for what we write. Our advertisers vote the same way, by spending their money with us to get their message to the same readers that we reach.

That’s why I always plead guilty when accused of “just trying to sell newspapers.” To me, it’s akin to accusing a car dealer of “just trying to sell cars.” Of course we’re trying to sell newspapers. That’s the line of work we’re in.

We are far from perfect. We make too many mistakes. Too often we don’t do as good a job explaining things as we should. But we won’t quit trying, and we won’t quit raising hell when it’s needed, because that is our job.

I’m not sure I deserve the title of muckraker. But I’d be proud to wear it.

Any editor would.

xxxx