Americans Reject Newspaper Subsidies

by Erik Sass , June 9, 2010

newspaper

Confirming what most people already suspect, a new Rasmussen Reports poll found that a majority of Americans oppose any kind of taxes or fees to subsidize the ailing newspaper business.

In a phone survey on June 6-7, Rasmussen asked 1,000 U.S. adults about various ideas proposed by the Federal Trade Commission to help shore up the industry's finances. All where rejected by most of the respondents. 84% of respondents reject the idea of a 3% tax on mobile phone bills, 76% reject the idea of a tax on consumer electronics, and 74% reject the idea of a tax on "news aggregators."

These results make it clear that Americans do not believe newspapers need or deserve help from the government. This may reflect growing concern about "big government," its involvement in the sector and the threat of new taxes. But they also reflect specific sentiments about the news business in particular.

While the first two proposed taxes (on cell phones and consumer electronics) do not seem to have any discernible relation to the news business, the last proposed tax on online news aggregators represents a more precise, targeted mechanism to redistribute wealth within the news business.

By rejecting this idea, however, the Rasmussen respondents affirm that publishers must sink or swim -- either determine how to support themselves with online subscriptions and advertising, or go under.

Those polled understand their position could mean the demise of more newspapers; they seem willing to accept this outcome. Rasmussen found that 58% of respondents said online news sources and other traditional news outlets can step in to make up for the loss of newspaper reporting.

death of print, news, newspapers, trends

3 comments about "Americans Reject Newspaper Subsidies".

Check to receive email when comments are posted.

William Hughes from Arnold Aerospace, June 10, 2010 at 8:17 a.m.
The Newspapers, among other forms of Media, are Dinosaurs. They had their era, which ended when an "Asteroid" called the Internet arrived on the scene. Times change, and they aren't the first industry to become affected because of technological change. Now please excuse me, I have to find a store that sells Buggy Whips.
Reply

Paula Lynn from Who Else Unlimited, June 10, 2010 at 9:35 a.m.

The wrong questions are being asked. The objections to government subsidies should not be based on cost. It should be based on influence, power and control of information. The newspaper industry needs to thrive and re-blossom, but will not and should not with government subsidies on any level.

Jonathan Mirow from BroadbandVideo, Inc., June 10, 2010 at 6:26 p.m.

Anybody who has survived for any length of time in the "new media" (read: internet) space does so by constantly re-inventing themselves and their product. My company doesn't do today what it did two years ago and most certainly doesn't do what it SET OUT to do 10 years ago. Yet we're still here - and we're not in line for government money (tho' I'm a self-professed slut, if they gave me some I'd take it). It's the single-minded obstinance of the executives who run (or ran, actually) the newspaper industry and their complete inability to embrace ANY sort of change that has placed them where they are today. They made their bed - you know the rest.