Phoenix, the nation's fifth-largest city, hasn't had a newspaper since 2007. I'm not being snarky. The storied, beloved and hated Arizona Republic was replaced by The Information Center. Its owner Gannett was very clear about this when the change was made. Staffers were told over and over: "We're not a newspaper anymore." It shows.
That's too bad, because troubled places, corruption, exploitation of the weak and the crushing of fair play thrive when there's no real newspaper. Wal-Mart quit the despicable practice of taking out insurance policies -- payable to the company -- on its minimum-wage, part-time workers only when the practice was reported by the Wall Street Journal. Exposing wrongs in a complex world, and explaining that world, usually takes highly trained, highly motivated, intensely curious veteran journalists. Such work can't be done by "crowd-sourcing" or "citizen journalists" or any of the cheap fads publishers have used to get rid of their cranky, higher-paid intellectual capital. Some fine journalists remain at The Information Center, but they are rarely allowed to really follow their calling, especially upon a growing herd of sacred cows.
Oh, for a newspaper in Phoenix. One to write hard-news-put-'em-in-jail investigative journalism. One to afflict the comfortable and comfort the afflicted. To report the news and raise hell. To dig through court, government and business records, and cultivate deep, authoritative sources. To illuminate and hold accountable the most dominant institutions. If it existed, I can think of ten major stories to get it started:
1. The vast, interlocking business and political power of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints and how it influences public policy. How much wealth and land holdings does the church itself own and how does it use its institutional influence? Who are the most powerful Mormon leaders and how does the LDS business network operate?
2. Charter schools. Some very good charters exist around the country, but in Arizona it's mostly another racket, coming at the expense of real public-school funding and lacking transparency and accountability. Who's profiting, especially at the expense of students -- and who are their sugar daddies in the Legislature? How do these schools actually perform and what's the damage done to children at the worst ones? E.g., the one whose "cafeteria" was a roach coach that stopped by mid-day.
3. Shine a spotlight into Phoenix City Hall. The nation's fifth-largest city has a government with a huge budget, an entrenched good ole boy network and probably closets stuffed with skeletons. Sky Harbor International Airport, a mammoth entity with its own funding stream and little oversight, deserves special scrutiny.
4. What is the Corporation Commission? It's the second most-powerful branch of government in Arizona (if you leave out the Real Estate Industrial Complex and the Mormon church). How compromised is it by Arizona Public Service and other utilities? What else does it do? Who benefits? What are the hidden agendas?
5. What's going on at ASU? Michael Crow came to town like a beacon of hope. He's delivered much good. Yet morale among much of the faculty and staff is in the tank, and this is no longer just the ones put off by Crow's entrepreneurial model and tough expectations. What's changed? And how are the ambitious plans for the university really working out? The Info Center has always been afraid of looking too deeply in yet another gigantic institution with lots of money and little sunshine.
6. Who are the biggest beneficiaries at the Legislature from the Real Estate Industrial Complex, whether through contributions, threats or participation. Gee, any conflicts of interest possible? How has public policy been influenced, well-connected winners chosen, and future costs been pushed onto the general public? Who got rich? Who got silenced or defeated? (Other candidates and leaders, especially governor, should face the same conflict-of-interest questions).
7. Who and what are the most powerful lobbies, businesspeople and idle rich in north Snottsdale that you've never heard of -- and yet play a decisive role in setting Arizona's course. What are their agendas and how do they use their power? Ever hear of the Arizona Rock Products Association? Hint: It's not a geology group or an outfit that lobbies for transit, train service or urban infill. I'd especially love to see the benefactors behind the "Goldwater" Institute get a full journalistic proctological exam.
8. Who in the Anglo power structure has made the most from illegal immigration? What are the businesses? Name names. Bet some of them are the loudest shouters of "What part of illegal don't you understand?!?" And tell how they have exploited their workers with the wrenching detail of IRE's 1976 expose of Goldmar.
9. Who are the worst environmental offenders in Arizona? What's the damage they do and how do they get away with it? How much has it profited them to profane the state?
10. Water. It's a target-rich environment. Turn Shaun McKinnon loose and add five other veterans. Go beyond the obvious -- there's not enough to sustain sprawl-based growth (although that should be repeated over and over). What developers are bending or breaking the rules? Why do they get away with it? Is the Department of Water Resources effective? Is it influenced or bullied? Adequately funded? Honest assessments quashed? What are the "oh, crap!" things happening to the state's water supply we don't know about -- and who is getting rich because of it?
That's just a start. I didn't even mention Palo Verde nuclear station or the Salt River Project or the crying need for real police reporters.
Any takers?
Arizona's flaccid journalism and atrophied civic culture are locked in a death spiral. Not to get too conspiratorial about this (a phenomenon that's inevitable in places with too little information) but it serves a purpose. Cui bono? Our suspicions always tell us to follow the money.
There are so many bad bargains implicit in the Growth Machine that it's unlikely a city like Phoenix would either welcome or survive its revelations. Fortunately, the guiding light for investors remains the near short-term prospects. After that, the deluge. Or drought, in our case.
Journalists can still chronicle the losses and those of us who know this place can summarize the trends. But there are no crusading heros left in a place like this. Because real journalism would imply a place worth loving and preserving. That's over.
Posted by: soleri | October 07, 2009 at 06:32 AM
Well, I just read and ad on Craig's List offering an "article writing" job paying $.01 per word (That's 1 cent, for those charter school kids). Stories would be between 300-500 words, and they are looking for 20 to 30 articles per week. That's the state of journalism in the city.
Hey, what about New Times?
Posted by: hectoracuna.wordpress.com | October 07, 2009 at 08:58 AM
I'm a taker! Let's have coffee and talk about which one to start on. And I'm serious. And I'm not afraid to dig.
I would however like to add to the list:
11. Gender Bias (against minorities and women) in the AZ Court System. Especially with regard to family law. Especially with regard to domestic violence victims who are losing their children on a daily basis to abusive men who have more money than they do, are friends with the good 'ol boy judge, and utilize the services of corrupt custody evaluators. As an example: one well-known AZ (pro-dad) custody evaluator whose file I dug through at the AZ Board of Psychological Examiners had 26 complaints (90% being anti-mom,) 5 letters of concern from the Board (again, anti-mom mainly) and 1 censure and civil fine. He's still practicing. Why? These documented domestic (and sexual) abusers are winning either sole or joint custody in our state up to 70% of the time. Why? Best Interest of the child? I think not...
12. Major shoddy construction which was/is allowed to take place in the state. This ties in to the Registrar of Contractors, the building lobbyists, all of the state Representatives (and AZ judges) who are financially invested with construction companies, etc. Why are builders in this state allowed to file bankruptcy then just start another business in someone else's name? Why has there been no push for General Contractors to have required continuing education (in building science, building product advances and technology, etc.) in order to obtain and renew their licenses? Who is the Registrar of Contractor's protecting? Who was "looking the other way" during the planning and building of some of the major developments in AZ that are already riddled with mold and falling apart? Are we ready to learn from our past mistakes?
One must seek the truth - now more than ever...
Posted by: Stacey Champion | October 07, 2009 at 10:50 AM
What about the AZ Guardian, the new online newsite? It's too pricey for me to subscribe, but maybe someone here has an opinion on it?
Posted by: eclecticdog | October 07, 2009 at 11:31 AM
I'm all for looking into most of these questions. Though I suspect some of them have relatively benign answers.
I find #8 to be a racist, not to mention counterintuitive. First-of-all, what's the difference between "anglo" people making money from illegal immigration and those of another race making money from it? It's increasingly difficult to exploit illegal immigrants these days due to increased auditing and crackdowns in this area. Also, if you were a business owner exploiting these people, wouldn't you be against immigration enforcement, and not in favor of it as you suggest counterintuitively? (For purposes of full disclosure, I'm all for streamlining LEGAL immigration processes/work visas/student visas etc. but I support immigration enforcement)
Some real investigative reporting would be most welcome! As long as the journalists are willing to have their own biases challenged by their findings (as opposed to spinning their findings to support their biases, as happens WAY too often in the traditional media channels these days)
It's too bad the Republic doesn't report on things the public actually cares about... hence it's failing readership.
Posted by: Sean | October 07, 2009 at 01:42 PM
Phoenix "hasn't had a newspaper since 2007." Dude, don't be a dick. Some of us here are still your friends.
Posted by: The Republic | October 07, 2009 at 03:51 PM
Ah, the Republic's web presence had to weigh in. Haven't lost your touch, Jon. :)
Incidentally, I finally abandoned Phoenix 3 months ago and am having a prosperous time here in Portland...
Posted by: Petro | October 07, 2009 at 04:03 PM
Jon should be flattered that the Information Center actually reads Rogue Columnist. This indicates that they are still interested and concerned with what he has to say -- despite the fact that the publisher offered Talton a demotion, which he ultimately rejected.
Information Center, if you read this comment, I want you to know that I get my news about Phoenix and Arizona from other newspapers and Web sites that actually concentrate on real journalism -- e.g., The East Valley Tribune, Phoenix New Times -- and not from the Info Center, which would rather toss the LDS' salad and give Joe Arpaio carte blanch.
It's been years since Phoenix had a respected daily newspaper. It was called the Phoenix Gazette.
Posted by: ChrisInDenver | October 07, 2009 at 04:15 PM
Petro, I am happy for you. I escaped Phoenix in 2004 because I couldn't find a job in journalism back home. So, I left for Boston and was stringing for various newspapers within two days. Within three months, I landed a well-paying job writing about trade between the United States and the South Asian region.
Now, I live in Denver and have gotten out of journalism because of the state of the industry. Yet, I have a good job and am happy with the state of my life. Leaving Phoenix was the best decision I ever made. I'm sure Petro feels the same way.
Posted by: ChrisInDenver | October 07, 2009 at 04:21 PM
Thanks, ChrisInDenver. It was a tad bittersweet, having loved the past 33 years there (OK, well, maybe 25 of them.) The sustainability of that settlement is questionable even under the most sincere of leadership and that, as Jon so eloquently documents, she clearly lacks.
Peace.
Posted by: Petro | October 07, 2009 at 04:59 PM
Is it even possible to get balanced news reporting these days? With certain "rogue" exceptions, it seems much of what we get is preaching to the choir. I'd definitely be up for some civilized disagreement in the main stream media.
Would be happy to volunteer some time to assist a professional journalist.
As far as the Arizona Guardian goes, the minimum subscription charge would seem to mean their target audience is someone other than the working class. Since Byron Schlomach (Goldwater Institute), Tom Patterson (Goldwater Institute) and Nick Dranias (Goldwater Institute) are among the columnists, it's not likely there will be any probing of Mr. Talton's No. 7 above.
Posted by: Joanna | October 07, 2009 at 05:38 PM
Number eight may seem counterintuitive, but actually, anti-immigrant sentiment (and enforcement) is needed by those who wish to exploit foreign workers, provided it's mostly bark rather than bite.
After all, exploitation, in this case, relies on lack of status and fear. If everyone thought that undocumented laborers were no big deal, and authorities (legislators and law enforcement agencies) were openly blase, then it would be more difficult to get individuals to work 50-60 hours a week at minimum wage with no overtime pay, no benefits, and no workman's compensation in case of accidents in dangerous industries (e.g., construction).
Even peons start to get ideas once they settle in, get comfortable, and get confident. Remember that huge march of 10,000 or so undocumented workers in downtown Phoenix back in April, 2006?
"We finally have realized that America is open to everyone, regardless of their legal status," organizer Elias Bermudez said as he walked in the front row.
It wasn't long after that, it seems to me, that individuals like Russell Pearce and Sheriff Joe Arpaio got busy, Pearce with legislation and Arpaio with his brown dragnets ("crime suppression sweeps").
The Arizona employer sanctions law that took effect in January, 2008 was a curiously toothless bit of legislation, which would surprise those who imagine that its primary intended effect was to stem illegal immigration rather than to restore an exploitable class of workers to their former state of quiet gratitude and submissiveness.
Instead of requiring employers to perform federal database checks for each employee and document them, and making penalties contingent on the failure to do so, the law instead required prosecutors to prove that employers "knowingly hired" undocumented workers -- a notoriously difficult standard; and while the legislation states that employers must perform the database checks, it includes no sanctions or penalties against those who do not.
So far, not a single employer in Maricopa County has been prosecuted under the law, after nearly two years.
The unintended effect of the legislation has been to drive undocumented immigrants away from the use of (comparatively harmless) false IDs based on fake Social Security numbers, and into more wholesale use of stolen IDs using information from the life histories of existing or deceased citizens.
As for Sheriff Arpaio's "sweeps", they netted only a couple hundred undocumented workers out of the state's half a million or more.
Yet, the result is "mission accomplished", as the peons have been made afraid to raise a ruckus about the free movement of labor and other amusing notions. (Capital is free to cross borders, but labor is only free to be exploited on capital's own terms.) The wind was taken out of their sails and they are no longer "uppity", except for a hardcore few.
The whole game is one of good-cop / bad-cop, and it's a delicate balance. On the one hand, undocumented workers must always have a way in, and know that jobs await them. On the other, they can't be allowed to get so comfortable that they organize among themselves and aggresively challenge the status quo. Hence the alternating cycle of closed eyes and crackdowns.
Posted by: Emil Pulsifer | October 07, 2009 at 06:04 PM
P.S. The same is true of the cycle of amnesties and crackdowns. Ronald Reagan signed into law (1986) a bill giving amnesty to undocumented workers who had entered the country before 1982 and had resided here continuously since then.
The law supposedly toughened border enforcement and included "tough" employer sanctions, but the U.S. Chamber of Commerce changed from opposition to acceptance once language was introduced (the "affirmative defense" clause) that explicitly rendered it toothless.
http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/statements/2008/jan/06/rudy-giuliani/yep-reagan-did-the-a-word/
Posted by: Emil Pulsifer | October 07, 2009 at 06:44 PM
On Sunday, October 11, 2009, the state's non-paper of record published an article titled "How Arizona Can Repair Its Broken Government".
http://www.azcentral.com/news/election/azelections/articles/2009/10/11/20091011az-politics1011.html
The start of the article is promising:
"Is this the best we can do?
"That's the question being posed by civic and business leaders, politicos and members of the public as they confront a state Capitol defined by gridlock, distrust and dysfunction.
"Increasingly it is a place ruled by legislators on the political fringes.
"Compromise? Statesmanship?
"They've become rarities."
Wow! So, is the Arizona Republic(an) finally going to push for meaningful political reform?
Not on your life.
The article continues inside, listing "five problems and possible solutions":
http://www.azcentral.com/news/election/azelections/articles/2009/10/11/20091011az-politics1011.html
Problem one is "political extremes". Note the plural. "More and more, the Legislature has been dominated by extreme political positions on the right and left."
The only example given of political extremism on the left, in the Republican dominated state legislature, is the refusal of all Democrats to vote for the budget bill.
So, let me get this straight: the entire Democratic Party of Arizona is composed of left-wing extremists?
Evidently, this is the Arizona Republic's idea of "balance", even if the facts themselves are not balanced by political party. Instead of attacking the Republican extremists who actually control key budget and other committees, the Republic commits itself to characterizing Republican recalcitrance as "a handful of hold-outs" while slandering the entire Arizona Democratic Party. Brilliant.
Other "problems" listed include "legislative turnover" (Why not let the kookocracy reign forever?), "initiatives mandate spending" (voters actually wants services -- catastrophe!), "policy mixed with budget bills", and "Gubernatorial ascension".
The Republic's proposed solutions?
(1) Kill clean elections. (I swear, this is a verbatim quote.)
(2) Create "competitive districts". This is a non-starter, and not only because "federal law mandates that districts be drawn to protect minority voting and communities of interest" (wink-wink, nudge-nudge, know what I mean?)
(3) Eliminate term limits. Let the kookocracy reign forever! It's amazing how the Arizona Republic sees fit to post cranky, full-length editorial diatribes against the elected president of Honduras simply because he proposed to let the citizenry vote on a proposal to eliminate term limits for his office, whereas that's exactly what they're proposing be extended to the local legislature at large. Meanwhile, the newspaper remains curiously silent over yet another round of silence-the-media laws declared by the coup leaders.
(4) Undermine voter initiatives: because the only thing standing in the way of a well-run republic is democracy...
(5) Create an office of Lieutenant-Governor. Oh boy, that will really fix Arizona's political system.
(6) Keep unrelated policy out of the budget. OK, I'll give this one to the Republic: even a stopped clock is right twice a day...
Posted by: Emil Pulsifer | October 12, 2009 at 06:51 PM