Saw an interesting discussion on Twitter today about the Inewsource arm of KPBS. What shocked me was this passage from Inewsource promotional material that revealed some big money contributor approached KPBS’ partner and worked out a “three year joint plan” for their reporting.
Here’s the passage:
Around the same time, she said a local philanthropist reached out with concerns about the daily newspaper. “When he learned of the relationship with KPBS, we both met with him with a joint plan,” she said. The result was three years of funding to add another inewsource reporter plus an investigative producer for KPBS. http://www.j-lab.org/news-chops/san-diego
So let me get this straight:
KPBS is willing to run news “paid for” by a mega contributor.
That mega contributor is motivated by concern that the local newspaper is too conservative. Presumably the mega contributor has a liberal view.
KPBS runs stories that are driven by some undisclosed “plan” that was hatched in direct consultation with a mega contributor.
Good to know that at KPBS is for “pay to play” these days.
But it raises a bigger question of media bias in San Diego. About 18 months ago, Voice of San Diego faced budget shortfalls – even laid off staff.
Then “poof” – Voice’s budget problems seemed to disappear, and new hires were announced.
Since then, Voice has gotten pretty opinion-based, rather than news-oriented.
In one article, Voice even said they “lobbied” to get a city government policy changed.
Who is funding Voice? How much? What is their agenda?
We hear enough about Doug Manchester’s “bias” from liberal mouthpieces at KPBS, CityBeat and Voice of San Diego.
But you know what they say about those in glass houses…