"POLITICS AND OTHER MISTAKES"
Hidden agenda
By Al Diamon
The Portland Press Herald and Maine Sunday Telegram are wonderful newspapers.
The preceding sentence is an example of what experienced journalists call a "bald-faced lie." It's designed to conceal my motives. Sort of like how the Press Herald and Sunday Telegram concealed their motives in the debate over tax reform, by failing to mention the papers had a stake in the outcome. More about that in a moment.
The truth is that while I'm a big fan of "Mark Trail" and "Big Nate," much of what doesn't run on the comics pages in the PPH and MST ranges from disappointing to deadly dull. I read it, but only because those publications set the agenda for political debate in Maine.
Without the Portland newspapers, TV, radio and the Web would have almost no statewide issues to discuss. The outside-the-mainstream media occasionally break a story, but the majority of their content is either a reaction to, an expansion on or a repeat of what's already appeared in the Press Herald or Sunday Telegram. Even the Bangor Daily News, the only other Maine news outlet of comparable stature, can't compete with the Portland papers in the range of issues publicized and the impact of that publicity.
The PPH and MST coverage of the tax-reform debate probably generated more public opposition to the legislation than all the anti-reform lobbying campaigns - and there were a lot of them - combined. In a May 16 Press Herald story, the editors highlighted the effect an expanded sales tax, a key part of the reform bill, would have. It would extend the five-percent levy to "dozens of tax-free services," they wrote, "from body piercing, movie tickets and snow plowing to dry cleaning, pet grooming and plumbing." In a May 23 front-page story, the paper interviewed a barber distraught over the possibility haircuts would be taxed; a dry cleaner, worried customers would complain about the added cost, and a ski industry spokesman, fearful of lost business. The story was accompanied by photos of cute puppies, people walking on beautiful beaches and kids enjoying amusement park rides, all pleasures that might soon be subject to a new tax.
As public relations expert Dennis Bailey, the owner of Savvy Inc. in Portland, put it in an e-mail, "It read like an ad, something, well, that Savvy would produce to help defeat the proposal."
Which was probably the intent. But readers had to look hard to find the reason.
What was mentioned only in passing - in the story's 17th paragraph on the back page of the section - was that the tax reform bill would impose a five-percent levy on newspapers. What wasn't mentioned at all was that the Press Herald and Sunday Telegram were lobbying furiously against the bill, urging their employees to write to legislators on the Taxation Committee asking them to oppose the measure.
On May 31, the PPH produced a fairly straightforward story on how the reform bill would reduce the state income tax. But the headline was "Tax plan comes with trade-offs," and the subhead left no doubt as to the paper's sentiments: "Income tax savings could also bring the expense of sales tax on more items." The fact that one of those items would be newspapers was, again, referred to only in passing.
On June 1, the Press Herald ran an editorial headlined, "Tax reform timing makes for bad politics," which contained the none-too-subtle subheads, "Burden won't be reduced" and "Too complex, not enough time." Admittedly, this is an opinion piece, but nowhere in it is the publisher's stake in the outcome - defeating a new tax on his product - mentioned.
A June 12 story details the Maine Association of Realtors' campaign against the bill. No mention of similar - but more subtle - activities by the newspapers. A June 14 editorial titled "One more time, folks: Tax reform is not tax relief" again neglected to mention the papers' prejudice. A June 21 story says tax reform "has drawn heavy fire from business groups and disgruntled voters," without including the papers and their employees in either category.
Most of the PPH and MST news coverage of this issue has been fair. The bias has crept in through headlines, highlighted material and editorials that don't mention the newspapers' interest in defeating the bill.
"That potential conflict of interest could be completely erased with full disclosure," said Bailey.
He's right. When other publications editorialized against legislation to shift paid legal notices from newspapers to the Web, thereby cutting revenue to the print media, most papers made it clear they had what the Lewiston Sun Journal called an "obvious conflict of interest."
In the case of the newspaper tax, the conflict isn't obvious. You'd have to be a legal expert to find the language in the bill that imposes that levy. Responsible journalistic enterprises would have put the information right out front, both in news stories and editorials.
Doing otherwise taxes their credibility.
E-mailing me at aldiamon@herniahill.net is subject to applicable taxes.
