15 ms·

Here's another way of framing this headline: "A company that provides critical services has lobbyists - just like pharma, hospital networks, national defense, a

Here's another way of framing this headline: "A company that provides critical services has lobbyists - just like pharma, hospital networks, national defense, and food and agriculture."

coding123 4y ago
Shorter even: Lobbyists Exist.
mitchellst 4y ago
I think there's a bit more to it than that. It appears that a significant chunk of the local online news market in these regions is only financially viable based on pay-for-coverage arrangements with moneyed interests. So, I agree, lobbyists gonna lobby. And some of the lines in the article are pearl clutching. (GASP a utility company donated to a SuperPAC that opposed a ballot initiative? Yeah, that's normal. You might not like Citizens United, but that's just something they did, not something they're "accused" of.) But to the extent that you have a crop of local-interest news and politics websites that present as objective but, based on the quotes in the articles, wouldn't be able to exist without opaque financial arrangements that slant coverage... yeah, it's a genuine media story. Less about the power company, and more about journalism. (Which, indeed, Folkenflik is NPR's media reporter.) Alabama has high electric rates, an unusually profitable utility company, and this arrangement has proven durable. For me, that's a good enough "so what" for a New York based media reporter to condescend to the journalistic ethics of these Southern publications. It's not just academic; it's harming people.
tenpies 4y ago
Also: a news agency receiving funding from a US administration that hates some industries, is here to tell you just how bad those industries are. May as well be in Canada.
pessimizer 4y ago
Instead of volunteering PR and adding distractions, it might be better to say that power companies have "lobbyists" that bribe news sites in return for slandering critics of those companies. Even though it's strange to call people who bribe news outlets rather than politicians "lobbyists," because that sort of begs the question.
jfengel 4y ago
Everybody has lobbyists, but there are legal limits on lobbying. Lobbyists have to register and make some of their activities transparent. They're not allowed to be used for laundering money in political donations, which are sharply limited. Giving money to a newspaper to support a candidate may cross that line. It would take an FEC (or state equivalent) investigation to make a judgment (and probably the courts would want a say in it, too). Newspapers also have ethical limits. Ethical limits aren't legally enforceable, but for the most part major newspapers don't allow pharma, hospitals, defense, etc. to cross those lines. There are always exceptions, I'm sure, but the newspapers still cling to the hope that they'll be seen as accurate rather than simply shilling for whoever pays them. It undercuts their entire mission. So this isn't the same as the usual round of lobbying. Lobbying is a legal and regulated activity, a way for groups to coordinate access to politicians and plan their public relations. That always has the risk of being shady, but it's more above-board than most people imagine. Except when the rules are broken, and in that case it might be a crime. That's newsworthy.
fleddr 4y ago
Oh, I guess it's fine then. They all do it. Your framing is way worse. It shows nihilism and fits downright criminal/corrupt behavior under the much more neutral term "lobbying".
- brodouevencode 4y ago
  The statement was more of a comment on the acceptance of lobbying (by those accepting the lobby) for critical components of society.
nitwit005 4y ago
Publishing lies to destroy people's reputations, and concealing that you were behind the lies isn't "lobbying".

Here's another way of framing this headline: "A company that provides critical services has lobbyists - just like pharma, hospital networks, national defense, and food and agriculture."

coding123 4y ago

Shorter even: Lobbyists Exist.

mitchellst 4y ago

I think there's a bit more to it than that. It appears that a significant chunk of the local online news market in these regions is only financially viable based on pay-for-coverage arrangements with moneyed interests. So, I agree, lobbyists gonna lobby. And some of the lines in the article are pearl clutching. (GASP a utility company donated to a SuperPAC that opposed a ballot initiative? Yeah, that's normal. You might not like Citizens United, but that's just something they did, not something they're "accused" of.) But to the extent that you have a crop of local-interest news and politics websites that present as objective but, based on the quotes in the articles, wouldn't be able to exist without opaque financial arrangements that slant coverage... yeah, it's a genuine media story. Less about the power company, and more about journalism. (Which, indeed, Folkenflik is NPR's media reporter.) Alabama has high electric rates, an unusually profitable utility company, and this arrangement has proven durable. For me, that's a good enough "so what" for a New York based media reporter to condescend to the journalistic ethics of these Southern publications. It's not just academic; it's harming people.

tenpies 4y ago

Also: a news agency receiving funding from a US administration that hates some industries, is here to tell you just how bad those industries are. May as well be in Canada.

pessimizer 4y ago

Instead of volunteering PR and adding distractions, it might be better to say that power companies have "lobbyists" that bribe news sites in return for slandering critics of those companies. Even though it's strange to call people who bribe news outlets rather than politicians "lobbyists," because that sort of begs the question.

jfengel 4y ago

Everybody has lobbyists, but there are legal limits on lobbying. Lobbyists have to register and make some of their activities transparent. They're not allowed to be used for laundering money in political donations, which are sharply limited. Giving money to a newspaper to support a candidate may cross that line. It would take an FEC (or state equivalent) investigation to make a judgment (and probably the courts would want a say in it, too). Newspapers also have ethical limits. Ethical limits aren't legally enforceable, but for the most part major newspapers don't allow pharma, hospitals, defense, etc. to cross those lines. There are always exceptions, I'm sure, but the newspapers still cling to the hope that they'll be seen as accurate rather than simply shilling for whoever pays them. It undercuts their entire mission. So this isn't the same as the usual round of lobbying. Lobbying is a legal and regulated activity, a way for groups to coordinate access to politicians and plan their public relations. That always has the risk of being shady, but it's more above-board than most people imagine. Except when the rules are broken, and in that case it might be a crime. That's newsworthy.

fleddr 4y ago

Oh, I guess it's fine then. They all do it. Your framing is way worse. It shows nihilism and fits downright criminal/corrupt behavior under the much more neutral term "lobbying".

brodouevencode 4y ago
The statement was more of a comment on the acceptance of lobbying (by those accepting the lobby) for critical components of society.

nitwit005 4y ago

Publishing lies to destroy people's reputations, and concealing that you were behind the lies isn't "lobbying".