Methodology
During the summer of 2016 we began work on this project by analyzing relevant, recent surveys from organizations such as the Pew Research Center, the Engaging News project at the Texas Annette Strauss Institute for Civic Life at the University of Texas at Austin, the annual ASNE Newsroom Employment Diversity Survey, among others. The purpose of this desk research was to avoid duplication with our own proposed study.
This analysis took place alongside 60 in-depth, qualitative interviews with industry experts and leaders, the conclusions of which informed our sister study, “Local News in a Digital World.”
Following completion of these two activities (desk research and qualitative interviews), we developed an online questionnaire aimed specifically at journalists working for small-market newspapers. The Tow team reviewed and approved of the questionnaire, while Dr. Talia Stroud at the University of Texas at Austin and Josh Stearns at the Democracy Fund offered additional insights.
To help promote the study when our questionnaire went live, we wrote a short article for Tow’s Medium page and undertook a range of other activities, including emailing every State Press Association and contacting other relevant stakeholders such as the National Newspaper Association, the National Newspaper Publisher Association, the Society of Professional Journalists, and the Online News Association.
Our survey was highlighted by the weekly Local Fix newsletter (December 2, 2016)—which is part of the Democracy Fund’s Public Square Program—Nieman Journalism Lab’s “What We’re Reading” list (November 21, 2016), the Tow Center’s email newsletter, and in a banner advertisement on the Editor & Publisher website. We also shared a link to the live study on our own personal social media channels.13
Our online survey was in the field for three weeks from midnight (ET) on Monday, November 14, 2016 to 11:59 p.m. (ET) on Sunday, December 4.
We received more than 420 responses from around the country, primarily from editors and reporters. Responses were guaranteed anonymity. By allowing respondents to leave non-attributable answers, we hoped to facilitate a conversation whereby participants could freely critique their own operations without the risk of attribution.
In order to participate, respondents had to be employed at an American newspaper with a daily circulation of under 50,000 (which is how we define “small-market newspaper”). Weekly titles were also included in this mix. Employment status was self-declared.
Larger titles, those without a print product, or publications based outside of the United States were removed during our data analysis. Of 430 responses, 10 fell outside of these parameters, leaving a total of 420 responses for review.
Respondents were able to skip certain questions, while still allowed to complete the remainder of the survey. We made this decision to ensure the highest possible completion rate (also allowing participants to potentially bypass questions that were not relevant, or possibly unclear, to them). Completion rates varied by question, and these numbers are clearly identified in each chart used in this report.
Image 1: Map of Online Survey Respondents
Because respondents were self-selecting, our findings do not constitute a representative sample. Our conclusions should therefore only be seen as indicative of the state of the wider small-market newspaper industry. Nonetheless, as shown in our map of survey respondents (see Image 1), respondents reflect a broad geographic experience. They also come from a mix of daily and weekly publications, an important feature given that weekly newspapers—which comprise the bulk of American newspapers—seldom receive the attention we believe their circulation figures suggests they deserve.
In the following pages, we detail the key findings from our online survey. Where necessary, we have added explanations as to why certain questions were asked.
We start with an overview of our respondents, and then move on to a seemingly simple but crucial question: “What is it like working at a small-market newspaper?” We then delve deeper into specific areas such as technology usage and the concept of engagement, before concluding with the “big picture” and the future of the industry.
These insights flow from the 420 journalists who kindly took the time to share their views and experiences with us. Where we have added our own insights and analysis based on our further work in this space, we have sought to clearly identify this as such.