Down the Cardin Path - The dangers of nonprofit status for newspapers.
Ubiquitous
bailouts, we suppose it was inevitable that someone would come up with a plan
to bail out the news business. Sen. Benjamin Cardin, a Maryland Democrat,
yesterday "introduced legislation that would allow newspapers to become
non-profit organizations in an effort to help the faltering industry survive,"
declares a Cardin press release:
The Newspaper Revitalization Act would allow newspapers to
operate as non-profits, if they choose, under 501(c)(3) status
for educational purposes, similar to public broadcasting. Under
this arrangement, newspapers would not be allowed to make political
endorsements, but would be allowed to freely report on all issues,
including political campaigns. Advertising and subscription
revenue would be tax exempt and contributions to support coverage
or operations could be tax deductible.
There is both less and more to Cardin's plan than is described here. Although
his bill would expressly permit nonprofits to publish newspapers, there is
nothing under current law to prevent them from doing so. The Christian Science
Monitor reported in 2008 on some that already do, including the Monitor
itself. The only major substantive change in the Cardin bill is a provision
that would allow nonprofit newspapers to sell commercial ad space free of
charge, provided that at least as much space is allotted for editorial content
as for ads.
The danger of the Cardin bill lies in the restrictions that already apply to
nonprofits--a concern one media lawyer voices in an interview with Southern
Maryland Online:
"I think it really puts the role of censor or critic with the
IRS," said George Rahdert, legal counsel for the St. Petersburg
Times. "So the IRS would be able to say, 'This isn't fair or
critical reporting.' "
The Florida newspaper was donated to the Poynter Institute, a
nonprofit school for journalists. The Times still pays taxes on
its profits, so it has no governmental restrictions on what it
can print.
Cardin acknowledges the one hard prohibition that applies to nonprofit
publications: that against formal political endorsements. This column has no
brief for newspaper endorsements, which have always struck us as a rather
quaint practice (although they do often enough provide amusing fodder for us
that we'd be sorry to see them disappear).
But Section 501(c)3 of the Internal Revenue Code would prevent more than just
formal endorsements. It requires that "no substantial part of the activities"
of a nonprofit consist in "carrying on propaganda, or otherwise attempting, to
influence legislation" and that a nonprofit "does not participate in, or
intervene in (including the publishing or distributing of statements), any
political campaign on behalf of (or in opposition to) any candidate for public
office."
Taken at face value, this would seem to put a newspaper's nonprofit status at
risk not only if it published an unsigned editorial endorsing a candidate, but
also if it published a signed column doing the same. It would also seem to bar
editorials or columns urging Congress to approve or reject specific
legislation. Interpreted more restrictively, it could be taken to bar any sort
of commentary on pending legislation. Even the column you are now reading
could be construed as an attempt "to influence legislation."
That last example is probably a reductio ad absurdum. We have some experience
writing for nonprofit publications, and our sense is that what we are writing
now would be kosher under the prevailing interpretation of the Internal
Revenue Code. But we know from instructions we have received when writing for
nonprofits that the chilling effect of Section 501(c)3's restrictions goes
beyond formal institutional endorsements of candidates.
In particular, writers for nonprofit publications are advised to avoid the
appearance of partisanship. That's often sound advice journalistically, but
sometimes political parties deserve praise--or, especially, criticism. It
would diminish freedom of the press for newspapers to subject themselves to a
regulatory regime in which they would risk, in effect, losing their license if
they were too trenchant in commenting on politicians or parties.
--
It's now time for healing, and for fixing the damage the Democrats did
to America.
zzbu...@netscape.net
> With troubled industries from Wall Street to Detroit lining up for federal
> bailouts, we suppose it was inevitable that someone would come up with a plan
> to bail out the news business. Sen. Benjamin Cardin, a Maryland Democrat,
> yesterday "introduced legislation that would allow newspapers to become
> non-profit organizations in an effort to help the faltering industry survive,"
> declares a Cardin press release:
>
> The Newspaper Revitalization Act would allow newspapers to
> operate as non-profits, if they choose, under 501(c)(3) status
> for educational purposes, similar to public broadcasting. Under
> this arrangement, newspapers would not be allowed to make political
> endorsements, but would be allowed to freely report on all issues,
> including political campaigns. Advertising and subscription
> revenue would be tax exempt and contributions to support coverage
> or operations could be tax deductible.
Well, the engineers with brains, knew SOMEBODY in Washington would
do that,
since the Washingtoners are backward compatible to Noah.
But it's also why we're working on GPS, Optical Computers,
Broadband, Cell Phones,
Holograms, Digital-Terrain Mapping, Drones, AUVs, Cruise Missiles,
Phalanx,
Self-Replicating Robots, Biodiesel, Pv Cell Energy, neo Wind
Energy, On-Line Banking,
On-Line Publishing, On-Line Shopping, On-Line Rebates, CD-rom, DVD-
rom, In-Line HDTV,
USB, Meta-Processors, All-In-One Printers, Pv Cell Energy,
Microwave Refrigerators,
and Compact Flourescent, and they're still working on Noah.
sainthelens
----------------
"A Plan to Save Our Free Press"
By Benjamin L. Cardin
Friday, April 3, 2009; A19
The newspaper industry is turning upside down. The Seattle Post-
Intelligencer, the Rocky Mountain News, the Baltimore Examiner and the
San Francisco Chronicle are among the papers that have ceased daily
publication or announced in recent months that they may have to stop
publishing. Not long ago, Tribune Co., owner of the Baltimore Sun,
filed for bankruptcy.
None of this bodes well for our democracy. Our country depends on an
open and free press to monitor what happens in our communities so that
Americans can make sound judgments about their lives and leaders.
Thomas Jefferson, a man who was frequently vilified by newspapers,
summed it up best when he said: "If I had to choose between government
without newspapers, and newspapers without government, I wouldn't
hesitate to choose the latter."
Like Jefferson, I believe that a well-informed public is the core of
our democracy. How can we forget the role newspapers played in
uncovering the Watergate and Enron scandals or the AIG bonus debacle?
News stories, reported by journalists, often bring to public attention
decisions and actions that affect all of us. While the world has
increasingly fast access to news, one fact remains unchanged: When it
comes to original, in-depth reporting that records and exposes
actions, issues and opportunities in our communities, nothing has
replaced newspapers. Most, if not all, sources of journalistic
information, from Google to broadcast news or punditry, gain their
original material from the laborious and expensive work of experienced
newspaper reporters diligently working their beats over the course of
years. Not hours, years.
The Pew Research Center's Project for Excellence in Journalism reports
that a typical metropolitan paper runs 70 stories a day, counting the
national, local and business sections. In contrast, a half-hour of
television news includes only 10 to 12 stories. Research shows that
broadcast news follows the agenda set by newspapers, often repeating
the same items with less detail. And newspaper reporters forge
relationships with people; they build a network, which creates avenues
to information.
But America is losing its newspaper industry. While the economy has
caused an immediate problem, the business model for newspapers, based
on circulation and advertising revenue, is broken. That decline is a
harbinger of tragedy for communities nationwide and for our
democracy.
This is why I introduced the Newspaper Revitalization Act to help our
disappearing community and metropolitan papers by allowing them to
become nonprofit organizations. My goal is to save local coverage by
reporters who know their communities, work their beats and dig up the
stories that are important to our daily lives. Today, newspapers do
that job; all other outlets -- TV, radio, blogs -- feed off that base.
My bill would allow newspapers -- if they choose -- to operate under
501(c)(3) status for educational purposes, similar to public
broadcasters.
Under this arrangement, newspapers would not be allowed to make
political endorsements but would be permitted to freely report on all
issues, including political campaigns. They would be able to
editorialize and take positions on issues affecting their communities.
Advertising and subscription revenue would be tax-exempt, and
contributions to support coverage or operations could be tax-
deductible.
The measure is targeted at local newspapers serving communities, not
large newspaper conglomerates. There is little chance these
conglomerates would find such an arrangement appealing because they
depend on a revenue stream to remain operational. I want to make clear
that this proposal would involve no infusion of federal taxpayer
money. In fact, because newspaper profits have fallen in recent years,
no substantial loss of federal revenue is expected.
Under current IRS regulations, a nonprofit entity must operate in a
manner in which distribution is accomplished in a way distinguishable
from ordinary commercial publishing practices. My legislation would
create a category under the Internal Revenue Code for a "qualified
newspaper corporation."
Converting to nonprofit status may not be the optimal choice for some
newspapers -- particularly those that rely on a significant revenue
stream -- but this legislation would provide an alternative business
model that could help many newspapers keep operating. I am confident
that citizens or foundations in communities across the nation would be
willing to step in and preserve their local papers. Newspapers provide
a vital service. It is in the interest of our nation and good
governance that we ensure their survival.
[The writer is a Democratic senator from Maryland.]
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2009/04/02/AR2009040203310.html
zzbu...@netscape.net
> CARDIN KEEPS COMIN' ...
>
> ----------------
> "A Plan to Save Our Free Press"
>
> By Benjamin L. Cardin
> Friday, April 3, 2009; A19
>
> The newspaper industry is turning upside down. The Seattle Post-
> Intelligencer, the Rocky Mountain News, the Baltimore Examiner and the
> San Francisco Chronicle are among the papers that have ceased daily
> publication or announced in recent months that they may have to stop
> publishing. Not long ago, Tribune Co., owner of the Baltimore Sun,
> filed for bankruptcy.
>
> None of this bodes well for our democracy. Our country depends on an
> open and free press to monitor what happens in our communities so that
> Americans can make sound judgments about their lives and leaders.
> Thomas Jefferson, a man who was frequently vilified by newspapers,
> summed it up best when he said: "If I had to choose between government
> without newspapers, and newspapers without government, I wouldn't
> hesitate to choose the latter."
Well, but the Internet Publishing was developed to advertize
Robotics Systems,
Optical Computers, Holographic Systems, Microwave Systems,
Cellular Communications,
All-Digital Fiber Optics, On-Line Banking, On-Line Shopping, On-
Line Publishing, and GPS
services to customers, which the mainstrean press are willfully
ignorant of,
so it's the freedom of choices.
> http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2009/04/02/AR200...