For transparency, MPI should rename itself "Montana Propaganda Institute"

John Q Goes Public

by John Q. Murray

We received a press release this week from the Montana Policy Insitute-- MPI, as it likes to call itself. We printed it in its entirety, as we usually do with press releases from Montana groups and officials, because it is a good way to present people's thoughts in their own words, exactly as they wish to be represented.

The MPI press release announces the hiring of a second investigative reporter in Helena, in addition to its first in Bozeman. The new Capitol Bureau, according to the release, aims to promote transparency in state government operations. In this time of reduced spending on journalism, MPI is happy to share its materials with newspapers around the state.

Transparency is a very worthy goal. Perhaps as a start, the new MPI reporter might offer some transparency with regards to MPI itself:

* Where does MPI get its money?

* What role did MPI officials play in launching a partisan smear about Gov. Brian Schweitzer's speech to the trial lawyers?

As you may recall, the governor's ill-advised joke about rigging the 2006 election results offended nearly everyone, from Native Americans to the Butte-Silver Bow elections officials. Later reporting revealed that Schweitzer was spinning a typical tall tale from the West, and that he got carried away in playing to an audience. But the"news story" has been useful fodder for questioning the legitimacy of freshman senator Jon Tester, and will likely get dusted off for the 2012 election.

Transparency in answering these questions is important, because MPI in its press release goes on to proclaim itself a pioneer leading Montana into the future of journalism. To quote:

"Graham said with the resources devoted to reporting on the decline in recent years it is important for groups concerned with government transparency and accountability to step forward. 'We may be the first to do this in Montana, but we certainly hope this is just the beginning,' Graham said. 'Organizations from every political spectrum should see the benefit of supporting quality journalism.'"

Quality journalism yes, MPI no. Follow the money and it will lead to wealthy far-right-wing conservatives dedicated to weakening and delegitimizing government at all levels. A constant stream of stories about waste, fraud, and abuse can help with the free-marketeers' political agenda to eliminate government agencies that provide inspections, safety, oversight, and all those pesky regulations that might cut into profits. Just like lobbying, these "news" operations are small but worthwhile investments that pay for themselves many times over.

In our era, MPI's general philosophy--free markets, smaller government, less government regulation--has been closely aligned with the Republican Party. In this way, MPI's venture into news represents not the future but the past of American journalism. American newspapers used to be the organs for political parties. Their mastheads honestly reflected this, with names like the Daily Republican, the Republican-American, the Democrat-Gazette, the Press Democrat, and the Herald Whig. (Yes, there was once a political party called the "American Whig Party.") FOX News has proven that a business model based on partisan politics, as old as America, continues to be effective even today.

It would be fun to dig in and find out exactly who is funneling money to MPI. Phone records would determine whether MPI employees made those calls about Gov. Schweitzer while punched in on the MPI timeclock. But I'm not really interested in this kind of everyday hypocrisy. I am more interested in what its news bureau says about MPI's core philosophy.

MPI says it believes in free markets, yet says that because the private sector is reducing expenses and undercutting its ability to provide quality journalism, MPI must hire its own journalists.

In other words, by its actions MPI is admitting that the free market has failed and that quality journalism must depend on government-subsidies.

MPI, its employees, and its funders say they believe in individual responsibility, but MPI itself is set up as a 501(c)(3) organization to avoid paying taxes. The net result is that they are accepting a form of government welfare. It is government policy, not the free market, that makes this MPI venture possible.

And there's one other inconsistency that I just don't understand. The latest message from MPI trumpeted its news organization as "an unbiased news source that does more than reprint press releases." MPI then announced its new reporter by sending out, you guessed it, a press release. If news organizations should not be using press releases, why is MPI sending one to every news organization in the state?

There is nothing wrong with a strictly partisan approach to newsgathering and reporting. Heck, even Thomas Jefferson hired Philip Freneau to launch a newspaper for his own party's partisan political propaganda. But don't insult our intelligence by pretending to be a noble enterprise representing the future of Montana journalism. MPI's actions contradict its own professed beliefs.

There is no shame in being a political propaganda mill promoting Republican candidates and the conservative wing of the GOP. Just be honest about it.

If the good folks at MPI were really interested in transparency, they would rename the organization the "Montana Propaganda Institute."
###
John Q. Murray has an MPA degree from the University of Montana and is acting executive director of the Corporation for Public Community Newspapers.
###
See also: MPI hires Helena reporter
http://www.clarkforkchronicle.com/art...5181737568

###
Full disclosure: I helped write the initial grant proposals for MPI to the State Policy Network. In fact, MPI paid me very well to write a long expose about the empire building of an unelected fire chief and his conflict with the elected board that sought to reduce his spending. I recommended that MPI partner with existing newspapers and supply supplementary funding to help them support local investigative reporting. I also recommended that MPI pony up prize money to the state newspaper association for annual investigative journalism awards for all levels of newspapers. MPI chose to go in another direction.