By Bruce B. Brugmann
And so the headline in the new Editor & Publisher magazine proclaims, “Bronstein Launches New ‘Journalism of Action’ After Big Cuts.” And the lead says that “With its massive newsroom staff cuts essentially complete, the San Francisco Chronicle is embarking on a new approach to coverage that Editor Phil Bronstein likens to that practiced by William Randolph Hearst.”
Read the full story below for the juicy stop-the-presses details about the phrase “being bandied around in the Chronicle newsroom since last Thursday.”
Impertinent questions for Bronstein and Hearst corporate: Does “journalism of action” mean you will you now start covering the PG&E/City Hall/Raker Act scandal stories? If not, why not? And if not, could you explain which Hearst “journalism of action” tradition you are talking about? Are you talking about the anti-PG&E “journalism of action” tradition in which Hearst supported the federal Raker Act that allowed San Francisco to dam the Hetch Hetchy dam in Yosemite National Park for the city’s cheap, public water and power supply? Or are you talking about the pro-PG&E “journalism of action” tradition in which Hearst reversed himself in the late 1920s to support PG&E and oppose public power after getting a handy chunk of capital from a PG&E-controlled bank?
Let me put the question as simply as I can: Does the
new Bronstein policy mean that Hearst will end its longtime “journalism of action” on behalf of PG&E and start some “journalism of action” on behalf of San Francisco residents and businesses? Let us pray.
B3, still annoyed to see from my office window the fumes rising from the Mirant power plant at the bottom of Potrero Hill, courtesy of PG&E and Hearst/Bronstein “journalism of action”
Click here to read full Editor & Publisher article.