The chasm between the coastal media centers and the country’s heartland is laid bare. Deep discontent, long simmering in the manufacturing Midwest and Appalachian coal country, went largely unrecognized until this year’s populist primal scream. Even then, national coverage often came laced with enough condescension to remind people in the heartland why they distrust the media.
Not so long ago, “the media” would have included familiar reporters from strong regional papers, now sadly downsized and in full retreat from rural bureaus and issues. This election season more often saw the occasional correspondent parachute in for the misery tour of the unemployed and addicted. Tweet some poverty porn, tut-tut at a Confederate flag, and there’s no reason to get into the messiness of massive economic dislocation and the toxic legacy of resource extraction.
Yes, I’m a little bitter. And I’m oversimplifying. But I believe that restoring credibility for journalism must include rebuilding the capacity for journalists to work within the communities they cover.
These partnerships, plus earlier projects such as Harvest Public Media and Inside Energy, can help fill the void of local and regional coverage but they must all find paths to long-term sustainability. These should be recognized as an essential public service and nurtured to allow local trust and support to grow.
Election '16: Lessons for Journalism
As journalists continue to critique their coverage of the presidential election, Nieman Reports is publishing an ongoing series of articles exploring the issues, challenges and opportunities—from newsroom diversity to fake news to community news outlets—that will inform reporting going forward. See the full list of articles.
