Featured
Report

How Funding Local News Ecosystems Helps American Communities Thrive

October 31, 2023

Reliable information fuels our lives. We need to know who is on the ballot, what’s happening in our schools, where to find rental assistance, and how to make change in our neighborhoods. From daily reporting that equips people to act, to huge investigations that reveal corruption, the health of local news is bound up with the health of our democracy.

Over five years, Democracy Fund has invested $11 million in six geographic areas across the U.S., where residents and institutions are collaborating to better meet their communities’ real information needs.

This report tells the story of how Democracy Fund grantees created positive impact in their communities through innovative, locally-driven solutions. It also shares lessons for funders and local leaders interested in advancing a more equitable future for local journalism. As more funders consider local collaborative funding, we hope that this report will serve as a valuable resource.

We believe that funding local news ecosystems is an equitable way to support local news because it is rooted in community listening and redistributing resources to areas of greatest need. ​​In 2023, we have committed $4.75 million over the next three years to the geographic areas highlighted in the report, as part of our new Equitable Journalism strategy.

As we move forward in this work, we will continue to share what we learn, including a deeper analysis of the health of various local news ecosystems later in 2024. Sign up for our email newsletter to stay in touch.

 

Blog
Featured

Transforming Media through Press Forward: Democracy Fund’s Priorities

/
September 8, 2023

A national coalition of 20 funders announced an exciting new initiative on September 7th. Press Forward plans to invest more than $500 million into local news and information over the next five years, aiming to transform media across America in profound and lasting ways.

Press Forward’s goal is to revitalize local news and civic media in the short term while spurring even more support for people’s access to information in the long term. We hope $500 million is just the starting place and that Press Forward will help spark a movement across philanthropy to raise millions more.

Democracy Fund is contributing to this effort because we believe pro-democracy journalism, especially led by and serving people of color, needs far more resources. We have been blown away by the work our grantees have done to reimagine local news and with more support we know their impact can be transformative. This vision will require significant shifts in philanthropy and public policy — Press Forward can be the spark.

Guided by our vision and strategy

We want you to know that our involvement in Press Forward is an addition to Democracy Fund’s existing strategy, not a departure. Our core values and vision remain central to our work with Press Forward, and our current grantmaking strategy will continue uninterrupted.

Democracy Fund has been a guiding partner in the Press Forward coalition for over a year, and we will continue to actively participate in this work. We are finalizing our financial contribution to Press Forward, which will be new dollars above and beyond our existing funding for local news.

While Press Forward’s announcement was a significant milestone, it is just the beginning of this work. There is still much to do to build this new effort. As the coalition prepares to distribute resources in the coming years, we are filled with a sense of purpose and excitement for the journey ahead.

Centering racial justice in coalition work

Equitable journalism is a priority for us at Democracy Fund. Press Forward plans to deploy half a billion dollars to local news, and we are committed to advocating for investments that move us toward a more inclusive, multi-racial democracy.

In ten years, we envision a thriving local news landscape where civic media organizations provide the reliable information people need. These organizations will be essential in helping individuals lead meaningful lives, address challenges in their communities, and actively participate in our democracy.

At Democracy Fund, we hope to foster a public square that is anti-racist and community-centered, where voices that have been marginalized for far too long have a platform. By placing racial justice at the heart of our work with coalitions like Press Forward, we aim to create a media landscape that reflects the diversity of our communities and serves them wholeheartedly.

Listening and learning every step of the way

Civic media and local news are a growing priority for many funders and donors, including those new to journalism. Thanks to the pioneering work of trailblazing organizations, we’re living through the most significant and hopeful expansion of civic news since the establishment of public broadcasting over fifty years ago. Press Forward builds upon that foundation.

When Democracy Fund shared our five-year strategy last year, we reinforced our commitment to deeply listening to our grantees. They told us about the history of racism in media, how philanthropy has perpetuated harm, and how our news and information landscape can be reimagined — these conversations continue to guide our approach to this work. We brought these lessons and inspiration from our grantees to every Press Forward meeting, as did many other partners.

We continue to trust those who know what’s most needed for their communities. In Press Forward and all our efforts, we take our cues from grantee leadership, wisdom, and creativity.

A shared commitment to impact

An unshakable belief that we can achieve lasting, meaningful change guides our path. We are energized by Press Forward’s shared commitment to pursue collective impact. We look forward to further developing and deepening partnerships toward a more resilient, diverse, and deeply impactful media landscape.

We know you’re likely to have questions, and we’ve had some of our own along the way. Press Forward is a complex new campaign with many stakeholders. It won’t always get things right. As Press Forward evolves, Democracy Fund is committed to ongoing relationship-building, listening, and sharing what we’ve learned.

Our door is open for conversation; we invite your questions, feedback, and ideas.

Featured
Report

Learning from Digital Democracy Portfolio Grantees

August 7, 2023

Democracy Fund’s Digital Democracy Portfolio (DDP) and its grantees have been radically reimagining platform accountability and media policy through strategies at the intersection of reparation and rights.

To support this work, the team’s evaluation and learning partner, ORS Impact, conducted learning conversations with DDP grantees in March and April 2023 to understand the current state of the media and technology policy field and facilitate real-time learning among grantees. The conversations focused on three key areas:

  • Coordination in the field
  • The network of state and local advocates in the field
  • If and how the field is considering and/or engaging in narrative and cultural change strategies

This report summarizes findings across the learning conversations and highlights feedback for Democracy Fund and philanthropy more broadly.

Featured
Press Release

Digital Equity & Opportunity Initiative (DEOI)

June 29, 2023

The Digital Equity and Opportunity Initiative’s mission is to jumpstart the building of a lasting civic infrastructure. DEOI will provide core funding support to state broadband coalitions with broad-based community engagement and that have the mobilization capacity to maximize the opportunity and drive equitable outcomes in digital access.

Featured
Press Release

Democracy Fund Welcomes New Leadership to its Board of Directors and Programs

April 13, 2023

As part of the organization’s ongoing development in service of its new strategy, Democracy Fund is pleased to announce the expansion of its board of directors and organizational leadership.

Three new board members began their two-year term on Tuesday, March 21:

Danielle Allen, professor of public policy, politics, and ethics at Harvard University, director of the Edmond and Lily Safra Center for Ethics, and James Bryant Conant University professor, one of Harvard’s highest honors. She is also founder and president of Partners In Democracy.

Crystal Hayling, executive director of Libra Foundation and a leading advocate for racial justice in philanthropy. During the global pandemic and racial justice uprisings of 2020, she doubled Libra’s grantmaking and launched the Democracy Frontlines Fund.

Sabeel Rahman, associate professor of law at Brooklyn Law School, and a co-founder and co-chair of the Law and Political Economy Project. Previously, Mr. Rahman led the Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs (OIRA) in the Office of Management and Budget and served as the president of Demos.

“I’m honored to welcome our new board members to Democracy Fund. Each joins with invaluable expertise in the pro-democracy movement, a deep commitment to racial justice, and a keen understanding of what it will take to move our democracy toward a more inclusive, just, and trustworthy future,” said Democracy Fund President Joe Goldman.

Goldman also serves on the Democracy Fund board of directors along with board chair Pat Christen and board member Sarah Steven.

As prominent leaders with extensive expertise in efforts to create a more inclusive, multi-racial democracy, these new board members will be important partners in implementing Democracy Fund’s new organizational strategy.

Democracy Fund’s sister organization, Democracy Fund Voice, also announced new appointees to its board of directors: Deepak Bhargava, lecturer in urban studies at the City University of New York, and Robinson Jacobs of Comprehensive Financial Management.

New Programmatic Leadership 

Democracy Fund is also pleased to announce Sanjiv Rao as our new managing director of media and movements to oversee our Public Square and Just & Inclusive Society programs. Sanjiv most recently served as a senior equity fellow in the Office of Management Budget in the Executive Office of the President, on assignment from his role as a senior fellow at Race Forward, working to support federal agency action plans to advance racial equity and support for underserved communities. Before that, he completed a nearly decade-long program term at the Ford Foundation, concluding as director of the Civic Engagement and Government program.

Sanjiv joins Lara Flint, managing director of elections and institutions. She is a skilled advocate with more than 20 years of legal, public policy, and government experience, including a decade on Capitol Hill. Lara previously served as director of the Governance program at Democracy Fund. Before joining Democracy Fund in 2017, she served as chief counsel for national security to then-Chairman Patrick Leahy of the Senate Judiciary Committee, where she led the committee’s work on national security, privacy, and technology.

“Together, Sanjiv and Lara will play a critical role in executing Democracy Fund’s new strategy, strengthening the organization’s grantmaking efforts, and positioning more pro-democracy champions for long term transformational work,” said Laura Chambers, Democracy Fund chief operating officer. “As our organization continues to evolve, our new, dynamic leadership will help us pave a path forward in our pursuit to strengthen American democracy. We are excited for what they will enable us to achieve.”

Additionally, Tom Glaisyer has been appointed executive advisor to the president. As one of Democracy Fund’s earliest staff members, Tom built the organization’s Public Square program and most recently oversaw the organization’s programs as managing director. In his new role, he will forge collaborations between Democracy Fund and its peer organizations across The Omidyar Group, as well as work with the organization’s leadership to anticipate and prepare for long-term threats and opportunities.

These changes occur at a pivotal time for the organization, as Democracy Fund nears its tenth anniversary in 2024. We expect our new, dynamic leadership to challenge us, guide us, and help us pave a path forward toward a more inclusive, multiracial democracy.

Blog
Featured

Democracy Fund’s New Digital Democracy Strategy

/
December 12, 2022

We wish to plead our own cause. Too long have others spoken for us. – Freedom’s Journal, 1827

In April 2022, Democracy Fund announced our new organizational strategy with a commitment to investing in the power and leadership of communities of color to strengthen and expand the pro-democracy movement and undermine those who threaten the ideals of our inclusive, multiracial democracy. It’s a bold, ambitious plan that will steadily guide us as we navigate both known and unforeseen challenges affecting our democracy.

The digital media platforms and systems that now comprise so much of today’s civic engagement and community life have become essential for staying informed and connected. But many of the platforms that people turn to have also been weaponized by hate groups, authoritarians, and other bad actors to suppress and depress voter turnout, harass women and people of color, spread divisive disinformation, and violate civil rights laws. The power to control conversations and filter information lies with just a handful of private companies.

With this in mind, our Public Square program has revised its Digital Democracy strategies in line with our new organizational strategy to better meet the moment we are in. We envision a society where Black, Indigenous, and people of color fully and equitably create, access, and enjoy media and technology that represents their needs, concerns, and dreams. As a result, America’s public square becomes more inclusive and contributes to a thriving pro-democracy movement.

Our new five-year strategies are the result of many thoughtful conversations with our grantees and lessons from the field. We cannot overstate how much we appreciate the expertise, passion, and creativity of these organizations, whose staff are working on the frontlines of these issues. Our grantees are always one step ahead, and their pivots have often preceded the challenges other researchers and analysts have eventually spotted. We look forward to continuing our collaborative approach with our grantees, as we aim for transformative impact together.

The strategies below are focused on our Digital Democracy work, which makes up half of our Public Square team’s grantmaking. In addition to the Digital Democracy strategy updates, you can find updates about our Equitable Journalism work here. We look forward to hearing your thoughts on what elements excite you, and we know we have a tremendous responsibility to help make these ideas a reality.

Building power for an inclusive, multiracial democracy through the digital public square

Our Digital Democracy strategy is working toward an inclusive, multiracial democracy in the United States where civil and human rights online are respected and grounded in an equitable civic infrastructure that is open, just, resilient, and trustworthy. To get there, we believe we need a more comprehensive policy analysis and movement-building agenda for how we will support the media and digital systems we need beyond traditional commercial markets. At every step, the movement will be led by Black, Indigenous, and people of color, who have experienced disproportionately low levels of digital ownership and creation opportunities and disproportionately high levels of harm on digital platforms.

In support of this future, our Public Square program will be funding digital democracy efforts through two areas of focus:

  1. Our Equitable Civic Infrastructure initiative will fund organizations that build public pressure to change media and telecommunication policy at the state and federal levels. This work will create the equitable access to the news and information Americans need to thrive.
  2. Our Civil & Human Rights Online initiative will fund organizations that are reigning in the systems and structures that make online spaces so toxic and dangerous. By applying principles like antidiscrimination, public accommodations, and equal protection under the law, they are transforming how we experience the internet.

These areas of focus build on our learnings from the last five years, especially informed by our conversations with our grantees about how philanthropy needs to meet this moment in our democracy, the longtime harms media has perpetuated that got us here, and the role of philanthropy in exacerbating these challenges. We have collected some of that learning in a recent evaluation ORS Impact produced. We were also guided by an advisory group including Alicia Bell of the Racial Equity in Journalism Fund, Courtney Lewis of the Institute for Nonprofit News, Jessica Gonzáles of Free Press, Lizzy Hazeltine of the NC Local News Lab Fund, and Chenjerai Kumanyika of New York University.

Some changes you will see in our digital democracy funding

In the next five years, we are focusing our support on the leaders and organizations that can combat the inequitable systems that have limited internet access, stymied local journalism, and led to widespread discrimination online. To advance our goals, we need race-conscious equitable government intervention into our tech and media systems, and we must invest in state and local base building. And at every step, establishing civil and human rights online is imperative to support the communities facing harms caused by these platforms, while working to address the underlying causes. This intentional shift from reactionary pivots to a long-term vision will allow for hopeful, future-focused movement-building led by BIPOC voices.

A few of the key shifts include:

  • Our new strategy includes a focus on platforms but expands beyond that to the full suite of infrastructure that constitutes our digital public square; and our tactics have homed in on the role of enforceable rules through the courts and government agencies.
  • We now recognize the important role of organizing, both to impact outcomes at the local level where early legislative wins can scale up, and to better connect national issues with the last-mile impact on communities. There can be no lasting change without a movement of people supporting it.
  • We understand that civil and human rights laws are the best opportunity to enforce the equitable treatment people need in online spaces to fully participate in our digital public square, and we will invest accordingly in enforcing these laws.

As we begin implementing our new strategies, we’re motivated by the opportunities for learning and growth, and we will be transparent, accessible, and accountable along the way. We are excited to invest in organizations that demonstrate excellence in building and executing programs aligned with our strategic priorities; exhibit a solid racial justice analysis; employ BIPOC in senior leadership roles; and work in concert with aligned efforts to build the power of marginalized communities.

Moving into the next five years

There is no doubt that the threats we face online are affecting civic participation, not to mention people’s physical and mental health. But there is a swell of support building to shift our relationship with digital media, with a particular emphasis on holding tech companies accountable. All across the United States, we see people recognizing the power they have over tech companies and imagining what a more transparent and less polarized future could look like in this digital age. As a philanthropic organization, we have a responsibility to help build a healthier digital media ecosystem, where people’s rights are protected and the civic information people receive is accurate and dependable. A key part of our new strategies will also be continuing to partner with other funders to meet this moment.

There are still many decisions left about who and how we will fund to make this vision a reality. We’ll be sharing more information, updating our website, and considering new grantees in 2023 and we welcome your partnership and accountability along this journey. If you have questions about our new strategy, don’t hesitate to reach out. We are grateful for your partnership and energized for our collective future.

 

Report

Learning From Five Years of Public Square Program Work

November 29, 2022

To inform Democracy Fund’s Public Square team strategy planning in 2022, we commissioned an evaluation of our program from 2016-2021. Our evaluation and learning partner, Impact Architects, developed an in-depth report that has deeply informed our new strategies

We are sharing here an executive summary that will provide an overview of our learnings across three strategies: 

  • Ecosystem News
  • Equitable Journalism
  • Press Freedom

This summary also shares what we have learned about grantmaking more generally — in particular, the critical importance of trusted relationships and the ongoing need for more general operating support.

Report

Learning From Digital Democracy Initiative Grantees

November 21, 2022

Democracy Fund’s Digital Democracy Initiative (DDI) and its grantees have been radically reimagining platform accountability and media policy through strategies at the intersection of advocacy, public will building, and litigation.

To support this work, the team’s evaluation and learning partner, ORS Impact, conducted learning conversations with DDI grantees in July and August 2022 to understand:

  • How advocacy grantees are planning for and adapting their strategies to shifts in Congressional leadership and/or agency nominations e.g., FTC, FCC)
  • What research grantees are learning about effectively integrating research into advocacy/organizing work

This report summarizes findings across the learning conversations and highlights feedback for Democracy Fund and philanthropy more broadly.

Blog
Featured

Democracy Fund’s New Equitable Journalism Strategy

/
October 3, 2022

In April 2022, Democracy Fund announced our new organizational strategy with a commitment to investing in the power and leadership of communities of color to strengthen and expand the pro-democracy movement and undermine those who threaten the ideals of our inclusive, multi-racial democracy.

Our political system and our media have been designed from the start to exclude and marginalize people of color, who have nonetheless often been on the frontlines reinventing journalism and strengthening democracy. The authoritarian movement has leveraged the flaws in our media to spread hate, manipulate public discourse, and build news ecosystems to amplify its vision for America. With this in mind, our Public Square program has revised its strategies to better meet the moment we are in. We want to ensure that all people have access to news and information that advances justice, confronts racism and inequality, and equips people to make change and thrive.

Our new five-year strategies are rooted in and build on the wisdom, experience, and vision of many of our grantees: we are deeply grateful to them for blazing the trails. We also want to recognize the many other leaders who have pioneered the work of media justice, community reporting, and movement journalism. Their efforts have often centered solidarity with communities and understood the urgent need for journalism that stands boldly for equity and democracy. Their work didn’t always find a home in our earlier strategies, and we are working to change that as we move forward and learn from the past.

The strategies below are focused on our Equitable Journalism work, which makes up half of our team’s grantmaking. We will provide updates on our Digital Democracy strategy when decisions are finalized (and you can expect to see similar updates from other Democracy Fund programs). We are excited to share the strategy and ideas that shape our journalism and media funding, but we recognize that these are just words on a page until we live into them.

Journalism must build power for an inclusive multi-racial democracy

Our Equitable Journalism strategy envisions people all across America exercising their power — making decisions for their families, mobilizing their neighbors and friends, and organizing in their communities — fueled by local reporting that equips people for civic action and serves them as partners. To get there, we believe we need to foster a reimagined local news and information landscape and an explicitly anti-racist public square, led by people who have historically been marginalized in our media and our democracy.

Throughout American history it has been leaders of color, especially those who are women or queer, who have pushed democracy and media forward, pioneering critical new community solutions and pushing for our country and our newsrooms to live up to their highest ideals. Our strategy process was informed by that history, and by the imagination and vision of bold leaders working today.

In support of this vision, our Public Square program will be funding journalism and media through two areas of focus within our Equitable Journalism work:

  1. Our News and Information Ecosystems initiative will continue to support the evolution of local news in America by building more vibrant ecosystems and equitable networks across the nation that reimagine news and information as civic infrastructure.
  2. Our Journalism and Power Building initiative will expand support for leaders of color, and the coalitions and organizations they lead, who are changing journalism and using media to build power and catalyze movements for equity, justice, and democracy.

These areas of focus build on lessons we have learned over the last six years. We have listened deeply to what grantees were saying about how journalism needs to show up in this moment of democratic crisis, the longtime harms media has perpetuated that got us here, and the role of philanthropy in exacerbating these challenges. We have collected some of that learning in an evaluation Impact Architects produced, which covers the last six years of our work. We were also guided by an advisory group including Alicia Bell of the Racial Equity in Journalism Fund, Courtney Lewis of the Institute for Nonprofit News, Jessica Gonzáles of Free Press, Lizzy Hazeltine of the NC Local News Lab Fund, and Chenjerai Kumanyika of New York University.

Some changes you will see in our journalism funding

In the next five years, we are focusing our support on those leaders and organizations we believe can help create a more anti-racist, community-centered media and advance transformative change in our public square. Key to that work will be shifting from a focus on incremental change in journalism institutions to transformative change. This transformative change must be rooted in movements, trailblazers, and coalitions inside and outside journalism that are building a new vision for what journalism can be and do in our democracy, who it works for, and with.

A few of the key shifts include:

  • Our new strategy will more explicitly elevate equity and racial justice as defining values across our entire portfolio by centering the work of leaders of color and those who have long been marginalized from journalism and democracy. We will invest more in those leaders and will focus on moving others in philanthropy in that direction.
  • We’ve long talked about informed communities as key to our democracy, but our new strategy is much clearer that information is power. We want to support news and information that equips people to build power for an inclusive multi-racial democracy.
  • We will invest less in large institutions and more in coalitions, networks and campaigns that help organize innovators in journalism to change the industry.
  • We no longer have a separate stand-alone press freedom strategy. Over the last five years, we’ve come to understand press freedom as a key part of sustainability and so we’ll still be funding some press freedom work as part of the infrastructure necessary to grow and sustain a truly independent media sector. We’ll also be leaning into efforts to confront harassment and abuse meant to silence journalists, especially people from marginalized communities.

As we move into our new strategies, we’re excited to continue learning and growing, and will be transparent, accessible and accountable along the way.

Moving into the next five years

While the struggles facing our public square are profound, there is real momentum growing around civic media and local news right now. All across the country we see incredible examples of people reimagining, rebuilding, and renewing journalism and the role it plays in our democracy. Those of us in philanthropy have a critical role to play in catalyzing this movement to ensure that the next era of independent media in America is just, equitable and thriving. A key part of our new strategies will also be continuing to partner with other funders to ensure we can meet this moment.

There are still many decisions left about who and how we will fund to make this vision a reality. We’ll be sharing more information, updating our website, and considering new grantees in 2023 and we welcome your partnership and accountability as we go down this path. If you have questions about our new strategy, please reach out to me — my door is always open. Again, my deepest thanks for your ongoing partnership.

Blog
Featured

How We Know Journalism is Good for Democracy

/
September 15, 2022

At Democracy Fund, we see every day how local news strengthens democracy. People rely on local news to figure out who to vote for, how to speak up at school board meetings, how to run for local office, where to find vaccines, when to organize for change, and more. From daily reporting that equips people to act, to huge investigations that reveal corruption, the health of local news is bound up with the health of our democracy.   

Unfortunately, communities across the United States are steadily losing access to this kind of civic information. According to data released in June 2022, at least one fifth of the U.S. — 70 million people — live in a community without a newspaper or a community at risk of losing theirs.

Since 2018, we’ve been tracking academic studies that show in stark terms the impact journalism has on our democracy. This research review has become a critical guide for funders, policymakers, communities, and journalists who care about creating a healthier democracy. In 2022, we overhauled this resource, including adding a section that more clearly names the harms journalism has caused in our communities, especially communities of color.    

These studies and articles provide an enormous set of rigorous data that help quantify what happens when local communities have strong local news — and what happens when they lose it. Understanding the impact of quality local news on our democracy in these sorts of specific, data driven, nuanced ways is critical as we think about how to build a more equitable and sustainable future of local news that truly serves all communities at a moment of threat and uncertainty in democracy. 

Do you have additional research to add, or are interested in how you can be part of the solution? Email us at LocalNewsLab [@] democracyfund.org.

(Ed. Note: This post was originally published June 26, 2018. It was last revised on September 15, 2022. We will continue to update the date in this note for future additions. Andrea Lorenz, PhD candidate at UNC Chapel Hill Hussman School of Journalism and Media, contributed research and guidance for the update of this post in summer 2022.)

 

Strong local journalism = more people turning out to vote.  

 

  • The amount of local political coverage correlates with increased voter turnout. Researchers in Denmark found that “local news media coverage has a positive effect on voter turnout, but only if the news media provide politically relevant information to the voters and only at local elections.” 
  • Voters have been more likely to vote in down-ballot races in places with more local newspapers per capita. By comparing data on legislative ballot completion with news circulation data, researchers from St. Olaf College found that even the existence of local newspapers contributes to the likelihood that voters will fill out more of their ballots. 
  • Local media coverage can increase voter engagement in state Supreme Court elections. David Hughes studied how these races can often be considered “low information elections” because of how little information voters can find about the candidates and stakes of the contest, but media attention can generate and distribute as much information about a race as a well-funded campaign.
  • People who consume local news are more likely to vote locally. The authors of a study from Pennsylvania State University examined the habits of people who consume local and national media, on both traditional and digital platforms, and found both types of news consumption are positive predictors of voting at both levels. 
  • The act of reading a newspaper can mobilize as many as 13 percent of non-voters to vote, Matthew Gentzkow testified to the Federal Trade Commission in 2009. The statistic comes from a study which found that “newspapers have a robust positive effect on political participation” noting in particular that one additional newspaper in a region can boost voter turnout by approximately 0.3 percentage points.
  • Consuming local journalism is associated with consistent voting in local elections and a strong connection to community. Pew Research Center analysts found in 2016 that more than a quarter of U.S. adults say they always vote in local elections, and they also have “strikingly stronger” local news habits than people who don’t vote locally on a regular basis. 
  • Reading local newspapers’ political coverage helps people understand how important local elections are and affects how much they participate in them. Researchers surveyed people in three small Midwest communities to learn more about their media use, political knowledge, and participation in local elections and found newspaper political news exposure strongly predicted political participation, people’s perceived importance of local municipal elections, and how much they voted.  
  • Local news can boost voting by young people, and help them feel better prepared to go to the polls. Research by the Center for Information and Research on Civic Learning & Engagement found that local news was a critical tool that young voters, especially people of color, turned to ahead of the 2020 election. The researchers say even more could be done by newsrooms to serve this population, and “local news media holds immense potential as a stakeholder in youth civic and political engagement.”

 

Weak local journalism = fewer people vote.

 

  • Voters in districts with less campaign coverage had a harder time evaluating candidates and reported they were less likely to vote. Jennifer L. Lawless and Danny Hayes used congressional districts as a lens through which to study political coverage (across 6,000 articles!) and civic engagement (through a survey of nearly 50,000 people) in the month leading up to the 2010 election. Then, the same researchers used longitudinal data to analyze how a decline in local political news coverage reduces citizen engagement. As political news about congressional elections in local newspapers declined over four years, so did citizens’ knowledge about those offices and voting.
  • When a major journalistic source of information declines or disappears, there are massive effects on local political engagement. This has happened in hundreds of communities where there have been large declines in local news. Danny Hayes and Jennifer L. Lawless also found that the “hollowing out” of American newspapers over 30 years — including a dramatic reduction in the amount of local news produced by newspapers of all sizes, with the most severe cuts in local government and school coverage — had massive effects on local political engagement, including decreased political knowledge, and less interest in political participation. 
  • Places that lost a local newspaper experienced a “significant” drop in civic engagement compared to cities that didn’t lose one. Lee Shaker studied what happened to civic engagement in Denver and Seattle the year the Rocky Mountain News and Seattle Post-Intelligencer closed. “The data from the [U.S. Census Bureau] indicate that civic engagement in Seattle and Denver dropped significantly from 2008 to 2009 — a decline that is not consistently replicated over the same time period in other major American cities that did not lose a newspaper,” Shaker writes.
  • When a newspaper shutters, fewer candidates run and incumbents are more likely to win. When the Cincinnati Post, which served both Ohio and northern Kentucky, shut down Sam Schulhofer-Wohl and Miguel Garrido observed that “fewer candidates ran for municipal office […] incumbents became more likely to win reelection, and voter turnout and campaign spending fell.” 
  • Less local media can mean less election turnout. Jackie Filla and Martin Johnson used data on voting and weekly and daily newspaper access in the Los Angeles area to investigate how access to local government information affects turnout in municipal elections. “​​We find that absent local news, voters are less likely to turnout,” they write.
  • Cities and towns with shrinking newsrooms had “significantly reduced political competition in mayoral races” and lower voter turnout. Meghan E. Rubado and Jay T. Jennings used a data set including 11 local newspapers in California matched up with the municipalities they cover to study the impact of declines in newsroom staffing over 20 years. As Josh Benton notes in his overview of the research, the study is notable because most similar research focuses on newspaper closings, not just shrinking staff. In a follow-up paper, Meghan E. Rubado and Jay T. Jennings interviewed working journalists to understand the impact of newspaper employment cuts on the communities they cover. Journalists they talked to described “corruption, mismanagement, lower turnout, and incumbency advantages” as outcomes of reduced government coverage. (We also recommend Nieman Lab’s excellent summary of the paper.)

 

Thorough local journalism helps people be less biased when considering candidates.

 

  • Giving voters even the slightest bit of additional information on a candidate (like occupation) in addition to having just the race or gender, eliminated or mitigated gender and racial/ethnic biases. Researchers experimented with ballots mimicking different real-life ballot designs that have varying levels of information about each candidate while using names that signal different genders, races, and/or ethnicities. Online respondents pretended to vote using those ballots. The researchers found that “When respondents have the least information, candidates of color—particularly Black candidates—are disadvantaged, among respondents across party, ideological, and racial attitude lines.” 
  • Local news coverage helps voters assess down-ballot candidates. Looking at people who receive information about their local elected officials compared to people who receive information about officials in neighboring states, Daniel J. Moskowitz notes that local political news coverage provides voters with “Information that allows them to assess down-ballot candidates separately from their national, partisan assessment.”

 

Quality local journalism can counter divisive national narratives that aim to stoke polarization.

 

  • One local newspaper’s experiment of publishing only local editorials slowed polarization among readers compared to a neighboring town’s newspaper readers. Joshua P. Darr, Louisiana State University, Matthew P. Hitt, Colorado State University, Johanna L. Dunaway, Texas A & M University out the reasoning like this: As Americans consume increasingly nationalized news, they become more partisan. By consuming more local information, people are more likely to be concerned with issues that affect them locally and elect leaders using these criteria rather than relying on national partisan rhetoric or cues to choose leaders. This can create a better democratic system. 
  • Local media establishes a trusted, shared public understanding of local issues, counteracting distrust of national media. Using focus groups, story diaries, and interviews with residents and local journalists in Kentucky, Andrea Wenzel examined how people navigate tricky conversations about politics and current events, locally and nationally, with neighbors. Wenzel found that recognizing place-based identities and media representations can help facilitate trust in journalism.
  • Local news availability keeps leaders accountable to constituents rather than the national party. Research by Marc Trussler shows that this accountability shows potential to mitigate the nationalization of politics. 
  • Political polarization among voters increases after local newspapers close down. In research published in Journal of Communication, researchers compared data on split-ticket voting and ballot rolloffs in the context of local newspaper closures.They found that places where newspapers had closed saw more people voting for just one party up and down the ballot.. “It seems like it’s the very existence of a local option doing the work here,” Joshua Darr of Louisiana State University said in a writeup about the report. “Just staying open seems like a fairly important factor, regardless of the level of political reporting in the news.”

 

Every dollar spent on local news produces hundreds of dollars in public benefit by exposing corruption & keeping an eye on government spending.

 

  • Watchdog reporting has an outsized economic impact. In his book, Democracy’s Detectives: The Economics of Investigative Journalism, James Hamilton is able to quantify the economic impact of watchdog reporting. By looking at the political and social change that resulted from journalism, and the cost of those stories, Hamilton was able to show that “each dollar spent on stories can generate hundreds of dollars in benefits to society.”
  • Local newspapers hold companies accountable for company misconduct. After a local newspaper closure, researchers found that local facilities increase violations by 1.1% and penalties by 15.2%, indicating that the closures reduce monitoring by the press. They used a data set tracking a wide range of federal violations and the resulting penalties issued by 44 agencies between 2000 and 2017, for a total of 26,450 violations at 10,647 facilities. 
  • When elected leaders are under investigation, more media coverage can increase the chance that they’ll resign from office. Marcel Garz and Jil Sörenson studied examples in Germany and found “resignations are more common when the media covers the case intensely.” 
  • Citizens are more likely to vote out elected officials when media outlets highlight the incumbents’ ties to corruption. These findings, from Harvard and Columbia researchers using examples in Mexico, demonstrate support for the media’s role in holding people accountable in a democracy. 
  • Without watchdog reporters, cities faced higher long-term borrowing costs — that  translate to immediate costs for citizens. Municipal bond data in the years after a newspaper closure showed that “cities where newspapers closed up shop saw increases in government costs as a result of the lack of scrutiny over local deals.” The study used data from 1996 to 2015 and tracked English-language newspapers in more than 1,200 counties in the U.S. “​​Without investigative daily reporters around to call bullshit on city hall, three years after a newspaper closes, that city or county’s municipal bond offering yields increased on average by 5.5 basis points, while bond yields in the secondary market increased by 6.4 basis points—statistically significant effects,” Kriston Capps wrote in explaining the study for CityLab
  • “Congressmen who are less covered by the local press work less for their constituencies,” researchers from MIT and Stockholm University documented in a study by evaluating their voting records, participation in hearings and more. They also found that federal spending was lower in areas where there was less press coverage of the local members of congress. 
  • Where there is unreliable internet access, there is likely limited government transparency and eroding local news capacity. “In areas where declines in local newsrooms and resources inhibit political reporting and scrutiny of government actions,” researchers behind this study of Australian communities write, “there is little impetus for governments to develop interactive digital practices (or to consider and respond to civic input) given that restricting such spaces is arguably an advantage in the maintenance of political power.” Taken together, these forces create “a ruinous triumvirate – ill-informed citizenries, illegitimate local decision making and minimally accountable local governments.”
  • A free press helps tamp down bureaucratic corruption, in many countries. “Of the probable controls on bureaucratic corruption a free press is likely to be among the most effective ones,” authors of this study examining corruption in various nations wrote. They found “a significant relationship between more press freedom and less corruption in a large cross-section of countries.” 
  • Watchdog coverage is more effective when it includes possible solutions to encourage civic actions. Reporting on its own doesn’t always hold power accountable. To do it most effectively, watchdog coverage should include possible solutions to encourage civic action. This finding comes from Nikki Usher’s interviews with business journalists at The New York Times, Marketplace public radio, and TheStreet to understand how journalists retrospectively considered their responsibilities following the 2007–2009 financial crisis. 

 

People feel a stronger sense of community in places with strong local journalism.

 

  • Local news — with local owners — keeps people engaged with their physical location and local government. Meredith Metzler’s research on this involved surveying people living in two different rural communities about their information habits and assessing their media landscape in the context of where they live. Metzler found a relationship between engaging with local media, affinity to local community, and engagement with that community. 
  • Local newspapers build a community’s sense of shared connection and place, and it’s not easy to replace them. Researchers came to this conclusion after organizing focus groups of community leaders in Baldwin City, Kansas and discussing the impact of the loss of their local paper  on business, technology proficiency, and community attachment. “The overall consensus was that residents miss having a single community information platform,” they write. 
  • Community members can experience increased loneliness, disconnection, and diminished local pride when a local paper closes. Through 19 interviews with community members of Caroline County, Virginia, following the Caroline Progress’ closure after 99 years, researcher Nick Mathews compiled examples of increasing loneliness, disconnection from community, and diminished local pride. 
  • Communication within place is critical to producing community. Lewis Freidland focuses explicitly on the intersection of communication, community and democracy in his research, and has shown compellingly how communication within place, especially the kind made possible through local media, is critical to producing community.
  • Newspaper reading correlates with respondents’ sense of social cohesion. Masahiro Yamamoto has shown that community newspapers are important to community engagement. (Interestingly, Pew found an alternative correlation to also be true. Those who feel “highly attached to their communities demonstrate much stronger ties to local news” than those without a strong local sense of place.)
  • It’s not just news outlets — storytelling in general is key. Connection to local storytelling was key to “neighborhood belonging, collective efficacy, and civic participation,” Yong-Chan Kim and Sandra J. Ball-Rokeach found as they examined people’s relationship to community media.
  • Even when online news is not as tied to geography, it can build a sense of place. In two separate pieces of research Carrie Buchanan (2009) and Kristy Hess (2012) document various ways local news builds sense of place and connection in geographic communities even when online news becomes somewhat more unmoored from location

 

Local news keeps communities informed during times of upheaval, like disasters, protests, and pandemics — when people need critical information to engage their communities and leaders.

 

  • Epidemiologists depend on local newspapers to identify and forecast disease outbreaks. Helen Branswell wrote that “When towns lose their newspapers, disease detectives are left flying blind.” In other words, America’s journalism crisis is also a public health crisis. 
  • Local media is often the first to reveal a crisis and draw sustained attention to it. The Pew Research Center studied how people looked for and found information about the Flint water crisis to help understand “how news spreads in our increasingly fractured information environment.” Their data shows that local media was reporting on the crisis long before national media was involved.
  • Media coverage can help reduce pollution. Newspaper coverage of polluters and emissions producers was correlated with a 29% reduction in the emissions compared to factories and plants that were not covered. “While coverage was generally lacking, [Stockholm University’s Pamela] Campa found that plants located in neighborhoods with more newspapers were more likely to receive negative coverage in the press. More significantly, she discovered that plants located in areas with more newspapers had lower emissions,” Sophie Yeo wrote for Pacific Standard about the study. 
  • Hyperlocal reporting is vital to research efforts across an array of disciplines. When Gothamist and DNAInfo were shut down suddenly, Samuel Stein, a geographer at CUNY Graduate Center, spoke to a number of academics about how, for researchers, local news really is the first draft of history.

 

Local news isn’t inherently good for communities just because it’s local though, studies show.

 

Journalism clearly has positive outcomes for our democracy, but it is not in and of itself inherently good. Studies show how local journalism outlets have harmed many communities with their coverage. Shuttering local newspapers is not the only crisis in local news — we also have to work to reimagine and rebuild how newsrooms serve communities, who gets to lead those newsrooms, and how reporting reflects the diverse needs of our nation. It is not enough to simply replace what has been lost — the following studies remind us that we must build something even better as we move forward.

 

  • “Since the colonial era, media outlets have used their platforms to inflict harm on Black people through weaponized narratives that promote Black inferiority and portray Black people as threats to society,” Free Press staff wrote in their rigorous, seismic Media2070 essay. They documented instances such as the deadly overthrow of a local government in Wilmington, North Carolina where Black people held power and other situations that connects racist journalism to lynching, promoting segregation, and more. 
  • Local reporting can fill information needs, but it can also replicate inequities. Local journalism, especially newspapers, provided critical information needed during the height of COVID regarding healthcare, emergency, and civic information. However, there were signs of information inequality, where people in wealthier, whiter counties had better quality and more local coverage than people in diverse, poorer counties.
  • Residents of a primarily Black community say they are not served by journalism that follows traditional practices of “objectivity.” In studying the development over 17 months of a journalism project intended to serve a majority Black community, Andrea Wenzel and Letrell Crittenden determined that “residents’ ideals for local journalism at times clash with dominant journalism norms and practices regarding objectivity.”
  • Paywalls limit access to information that operates as part of local media’s civic potential. While paywalls can become a helpful revenue stream for local media facing financial pressure, they also “challenge the civic function of the local news media,” researchers looking at Norwegian and Danish outlets assessed.
  • When purchased by corporate predators, local news becomes less frequent, relevant, and inherently local. The quantity and quality of local news decreases in correlation to these acquisitions by media conglomerates. Researchers came to this conclusion after studying more than 130,000 articles from the Denver Post, LA Weekly, the New York Daily News, and more.
  • Sensationalized coverage emphasizes short-term conflicts rather than social concerns. By studying the impact of a local newspaper in Australia reporting on a local climate change plan, researchers write “rather than providing an arena for public discussion and constructive debate, we find that the newspaper adopted a clear position rejecting the need for changes in planning for anticipated climate impacts.” 

 

What’s on the horizon for journalism in our democracy?  

 

These findings call us to take even more seriously the erosion of people’s access to news and information. The faltering of newspapers, the consolidation of TV and radio, and the rising power of social media platforms are not just commercial issues driven by the market; they are democratic issues with profound implications for our communities.

We have seen a lot of transformation and reasons for hope over the past few years since this post was originally published. News leaders are thinking about how to serve their communities, and reckoning with failures of the past. Journalism funders are coming together to fund projects to revitalize local news ecosystems. And funders who haven’t traditionally focused on journalism are joining in as well, realizing they will not achieve the change they seek in healthcare, education and more without information about their focuses. The research above makes the case for why we must continue working to expand support for quality local news that truly reflects and serves its communities. If you want to know more about how, or want to add additional research to this list, reach out to Josh Stearns at jstearns@democracyfund.org and Christine Schmidt at cschmidt@democracyfund.org.

Learn More

 

Democracy Fund
1200 17th Street NW Suite 300,
Washington, DC 20036