Christopher Schroeder

Tag: journalism

  • Another One

    Another One

    I expected more fundraising chatter when I turned on WBEZ this morning and was surprised by the regularly scheduled programming.

    I heard four promos and ads before any news yesterday morning. I heard several more spots and a traffic report along with some headlines before the latest financial appeals resumed.

    WBEZ reportedly wants to raise one million dollars by the end of the month. Its previous fundraiser, which ended about three weeks ago, seems to have left it substantially short of this goal, so it initiated a follow-up this week, and is reportedly still some $300,000 short of its finish line.

    The previous one, which lasted for over a week, offered monthly donors a generic stream that allowed them in exchange for any local coverage to avoid these appeals, which is better I guess than enduring this incessant and irrelevant chatter. This second fundraiser for whatever reason did not include such a stream for those who already donate every month.

    As a result I heard hosts offer some strange appeals. One explained that the donations from last year didn’t fill the financial holes in the budget for this year. Another suggested that a monthly donation was like the difference between a lump-sum payment and a monthly deposited check.

    WBEZ didn’t learn any lessons in other words and cannot balance a budget. It continues to blame its financial challenges on the federal funding cuts from more than a year ago as if these cuts hadn’t been championed by conservatives for years, and if responsible executives hadn’t had enough time to formulate backup plans.

    WBEZ didn’t learn any lessons in other words and cannot balance a budget. It continues to blame its financial challenges on the federal funding cuts from more than a year ago as if these cuts hadn’t been championed by conservatives for years, and if responsible executives hadn’t had enough time to formulate backup plans.

    None of these concerns and others has been assuaged by the latest Chicago Public Media initiative, which is a public social network called < chicago.com >. This network according to CPM will be a collaboratively-constructed public space for community conversations and local information as well as other content.

    Unclear at least at the moment is whether this network will identify curated content and if the rest will be assessed for accuracy, which are two crucial public media functions. How will users know whether the information in this network is as reliable as what they hear on the radio? How will they know whether these guides are as reliable as the ones that appear in the newspaper?

    This issue has already arisen in response to an AI-generated SUN-TIMES summer reading guide last year. It will only become more urgent in this new initiative unless users expect something other than curated and credible content in this space, which in my opinion would challenge a fundamental public media function.

    No one whom I read seems to know the future of journalism in this increasingly digitized world. Regardless, the stakes given the way AI has been seeping throughout societies might never have been higher.

    Countries still need public media to democratically survive. Communities still need sustainable public media to thrive.

    Here’s hoping that Chicago Public Media knows what it is doing, and is responsibly using what we donate.

  • Sunnier Days Ahead?

    I’ve known for weeks that I need to make some difficult decisions about newspaper subscriptions.

    I currently have daily Chicago Sun-Times delivery, and also receive the Chicago Tribune on Sundays. I also prefer print versions although I’ll read the Tribune opinion articles on a tablet throughout the week.

    I had traded the New York Times for the Tribune soon after moving to Chicago more than twenty years ago. I switched to the Sun-Times in 2022 after it became a part of the Chicago Public Media.

    Since then, the Sun-Times has lost much of its allure. More journalists for example seem to be doing cross-over work for the CPM radio station. Also, it recently dissolved its editorial board, and stopped producing editorials, and has fewer op-eds, and some days none at all.

    At the same time, the Sun-Times informed me that it was increasing its cost. After that, I was spending more — $9.50 for the daily Sun-Times each week in contrast to $7 for daily Tribune delivery — although I was assured that it would reduce my rate to $7.70 / week, which only raises more questions about the ways the Sun-Times treats its subscribers.

    Both newspapers seem to be nudging readers to go digital. Those who wish to pay for their journalism for whatever reason will spend $7-$15 / month to support the Sun-Times or $5-$7 for the Tribune. (The difference is access to local coupons or events.) Both newspapers at the moment also seem to offer electronic versions of its print papers for free, which raises a different set of questions about the future of journalism more generally.

    Daily Sun-Times subscription in other words costs more for less, and both newspapers are available, and more affordable, online if subscribers read these in electronic format.

    The bigger problem for me is the future of journalism. The reason I switched several years ago to the Sun-Times was to support a public media approach. I had long been impressed by the work WBEZ does, and I hoped that would stabilize and even develop the Sun-Times, which could only be good for Chicago.

    Such an outcome would strengthen the future of two competitive newspapers, which could challenge each other for their coverage. Moreover, it could expand audiences, and even offer a counterbalance to the hedge fund that had purchased the Tribune in 2021.

    Since then, I’ve been underwhelmed by this merger, which seems to have been more challenging than expected. I realize that the recently rescinded federal funding hasn’t helped, but I had assumed that Chicago Public Media would expect such an outcome, which has been a conservative goal for many years.

    I also had hoped that CPM would have resisted a reactionary response and instead would have offered a more brazen and bold reimagination of its contributions to metro Chicago and American democracy. Such a response would have reassured current supporters and inspired new ones.

    Perhaps CPM is starting to realize what it should do. Its CEO Melissa Bell, who described this rescinded funding as a “sudden loss,” nonetheless lauded the Chicago community for replacing 86 percent with “recurring community support” and to pledge a future of “true financial stability,” and twice the members, based upon a “100% community -funded model,” one that is “stable” and “independent” as if it couldn’t have had such plans in place even before that funding crisis.

    I also donate monthly to WBEZ in addition to my Sun-Times subscription, which given its free digital access seems like a second monthly donation. At the same time, I like many must carefully consider my expenses, especially as inflation increases, especially now that I’ve retired.

    Chicago is better with a second daily newspaper, and legitimate competitor. I hope that Bell and other CPM leaders know what they’re doing.