Why Readers Reject Newspapers

As a political consultant, I repeatedly witnessed bizarre behavior at newspapers that no other business would ever allow. Some reporters and columnists were frequently drunk or on drugs on the job. Such conduct was not simply tolerated, it was condoned. These third-rate Hunter Thompsons screwed up appointments and scrambled facts but were never called to account for their mistakes, incivility or disruptive behavior. Violent behavior by a top editor was even defended by the company and the editor promoted. He would have been summarily fired anywhere else.

Consider the following events in 2000 involving the purchase of the Chronicle by Hearst Corp, then owner of the SF Examiner:

The publisher of the Examiner offers to “horse trade” favorable editorial coverage for the mayor during his reelection campaign in exchange for the mayor’s support of the sale.

When the publisher admits this publicly, he is fired by Hearst, even though emails and hand-written notes indicate that he informed the president and chairman of the company of exactly what he was doing. Hearst later pays the ousted publisher a settlement reported to be near $10 million.

A federal judge accuses both the president and chairman of lying about what happened. The editor-in-chief and the editorial page editor issue public denials that anything improper ever occurred. To “prove” it, the newspaper hires the former general counsel of Chevron to write a report exonerating the newspaper of any wrongdoing.

The final report – predictably stating that no breach of ethics occurred – is printed prominently in the newspaper, even though the lead adviser to the investigation, a well-respected journalist, refuses to sign it in dissent.

Years later, the now Hearst-owned Chronicle hires the now former mayor as a Sunday columnist.

Despite these clearly documented events involving the paper’s owners, publisher and editors, the San Francisco Chronicle would have us all believe that this type of behavior has nothing to do with Bay Area residents abandoning the paper in droves.

I wonder.

Clint Reilly’s initial foray into political consulting at age 23 developed into a successful 26-year career in politics, during which he founded the nation’s largest political consulting firm of its time. Reilly managed winning campaigns for a wide variety of high-profile candidates, including current House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, Senators Dianne Feinstein and Barbara Boxer, and former California State Senate President Pro Tem Dave Roberti. Recently, Reilly has led the battle to preserve media competition in the Bay Area via two landmark anti-trust lawsuits (Reilly v. Hearst and Reilly v. MediaNews, et. al.). Reilly was chairman of the board of Catholic Charities/CYO from 2002 to 2006 and is active in a variety of civic and charitable causes. This article first appeared on www.clintreilly.com/ and is republished with his permission.