In my last column I talked about unicorns. This week it is time to talk about something more serious: donkeys and elephants.
We all know how rarely these political animals get along, but I have some good news. A recently proposed bill, HR 4756, is one of those infrequent examples of bipartisan cooperation. Being a newspaperman, the bill concerns a subject very near and dear to my heart: local news.
As national news outlets and online “reporting” descend further into a maelstrom of partisanship and unreliability, members of the two big political parties seek new ways to encourage local news outlets and small businesses at the same time.
Cutting through all the legalese, HR 4756 offers tax credits of up to $5,000 the first year and $2,500 thereafter to qualified small businesses that advertise with local newspapers.
Killing two birds with one stone, the bill will give tax breaks to small businesses and it helps protect one of the last bastions of reliable fact-based reporting, the local newspaper.
So far the bill’s list of supporters come from both sides of the political aisle and all across the country: André D. Carson (D-IN), Brian Fitzpatrick (R-PA), William R. Keating (D-MA), Mike Lawler (R-NY), Marcus J. Molinaro (R-NY), Chris Pappas (D-NH), Jill Tokuda (D-HI) and our own Earl “Buddy” Carter (R-GA).
Whatever one’s political party or personal feelings about “Buddy” Carter, it speaks well of him that he supports local newspapers. It says a lot when politicians of both parties can find common cause.
The bill reads in part: “The term ‘local newspaper’ means any print or digital publication if the primary content of such publication is original content derived from primary sources and relating to news and current events, such publication primarily serves the needs of a regional or local community, the publisher of such publication employs at least one full-time local news journalist who resides in such regional or local community.”
What is specifically important is the focus on “original content derived from primary sources”.
The ominous implications of A.I.-generated content loom on the horizon, threatening a host of human jobs, including that of writers. It must be remembered that these “large language models” are designed to analyze, interpret and mimic preexisting written and spoken content. By their very nature they regurgitate, vomiting pre-processed information back up at the user. They do not use primary sources, especially for local news, because they are not out in the field and even if some of their content is original, it is almost certainly also derivative.
A newspaper is an organization of flesh and blood men and women who “serves the needs of a regional or local community”. A.I. is a soulless product. It serves the needs and ideological bent of its corporate masters. The disclaimers on their user interfaces warn the unwary that it can give false information and incorrect answers.
Meanwhile, with sober transparency, this piece appears in a section clearly marked “opinion”. It is based upon verifiable information from public sources, but as a servant of the local community a newspaper clearly labels anything with a particular slant upon facts or events one way or another.
I’m telling you my slant. I think this bill is a good thing. If you take the time to read it, I think you will agree with me.
We don’t have to agree on economic or foreign policy, the debt ceiling or anything else, but the nature of this country should always be that what we can agree on, we can easily make happen. I hope we can make this happen.
On this very page, beneath the publisher’s information, The Blackshear Times quotes Thomas Jefferson, “When the press is free and every man able to read, all is safe.” Those are the words we in the newspaper business live by. Newspapers keep democracy safe and if passed, this bill will help save newspapers.
