Saving Journalism with Taxing and Spending

Some stakeholders have proposed amending the Copyright Act to specifically recognize hot news protection. Advocates argue "the copyright act allows parasitic aggregators to 'free ride' on others' substantial journalistic investments," by protecting only expression and not the underlying facts, which are often gathered at great expense. They define parasitic aggregators as those that, without permission post enough material to render the original news stories redundant. This free-riding undercuts revenue for those who make investments in journalism and undermines theirincentive to do so, according to advocates. They suggest that federal hot news legislation could help address revenue problems facing newspapers by preventing this free-riding. …

[Some] proponents of the hot news doctrine recommend that Congress amend the Copyright Act to provide express statutory federal protection of short duration and limited scope to the facts reported in news articles. …

The likely effects of a more vigorous hot news doctrine are controversial. For example, one workshop participant noted that New York's hot news doctrine was important to the AP's efforts to protect its intellectual property, but recognized that any "federalization" of the doctrine would need to be very carefully drafted to avoid unintended costs. Federalization of the hot news doctrine would entail difficult lindrawing between proprietary facts and those in the public domain.

[S]ome suggest that some sort of industry-wide licensing arrangement be adopted, perhaps with the government's help and support. Foreign governments have considered how to provide adequate incentives and funding for the news and are exploring, for example, the creation of government-fostered pilot programs to investigate new business models for IP and discourage free-riding. Such programs might enable newspapers and other content providers to experiment with “micropayments” and other means to monetize digital content. Such market and policy experiments may provide useful insight to continued IP policy discussions. …

[One] speaker suggests amending the copyright laws to create a content license fee (perhaps $5.00 to $7.00) to be paid by every Internet Service Provider on each account it provides. He suggests creating a new division of the Copyright Office, which would operated under streamlined procedures and would collect and distribute these fees.

Establish a “journalism” division of AmeriCorps. AmeriCorps is the federal program that places young people with nonprofits to get training and do public service work. According to proponents, this proposal would help to ensure that young people who love journalism will stay in the field. "It strikes us as a win-win; we get more journalists covering our communities, and young journalists have a chance to gain valuable experience -- even at a time when the small dailies where they might have started are laying reporters off."

Establish a National Fund for Local News. One report recommends that: "A national Fund for Local News should be created with money the Federal Communications Commission now collects from or could impose on telecom users, television and radio broadcast licensees, or Internet service providers and which would be administered in open competition through state Local News Fund Councils." The report notes that the FCC currently uses surcharges and other fees to underwrite telecom services for rural areas and the multimedia wiring of schools and libraries, among other things. These fees support the public circulation of information in places the market has failed to serve. If such a "Fund for Local News" were created, measures would need to be in place to reduce the potential for political pressures and interference as to how the money is distributed.

Provide a tax credit to news organizations for every journalist they employ. This could help pay the salary of every journalist. Although the proponent of this idea died before it had been fully developed, one speaker noted it is one way to subsidize journalists without the government picking one paper over another.

Establish Citizenship News Vouchers. Citizenship news vouchers would allow every American tax payer to allocate some amount of government funds to the non-profit media organization of their choice. People could indicate on their tax return whether and to which nonprofit organization they want a specific amount (perhaps up to $200) to be donated, but they would not be required to designate a donation. They could split their "federal funds" donation among several different qualifying nonprofit media. Proponents of this approach suggest it would create a funding mechanism to encourage viable independent Internet journalism while avoiding government control or the creation of a bureaucracy that could influence the recipients of the money based on politics. This proposal also could give foundations a role to play. Foundations could provide start-up funding for 3 to 5 years to help new ventures, "and then see if there is popular support for the venture in the form of Citizenship News Vouchers." If desired, this proposal could be structured to apply to commercial, as well as non-profit, news entities.

Provide grants to universities to conduct investigative journalism. According to one speaker, "if the nation's 200,000 journalism and mass communications students spent 10 percent of their time doing actual journalism, that would more than make up for all the traditional media jobs that have been lost in the past 10 years." Such grants also could encourage training journalists to use digital technologies to conduct investigative journalism.

Various commentators agree that CPB funding needs to be increased, and many believe that NPR and PBS stations need to build and maintain strong newsrooms at the state and local levels. NPR announced in October 2009 that it would launch a new journalism project to develop in-depth, local coverage on topics critical to communities and the nation. The project is being funded with $2 million from the Corporation for Public Broadcasting and $1 million from the Knight Foundation. One speaker suggested that with additional federal funding, this initiative could be expanded.