People Like This Paper!

So why is it so small?

by Doug Collins

A couple years ago, I sat and observed a bundle of Washington Free Press newspapers in a rack next to the racks of other local publications--including the Seattle Weekly, the Stranger, the Little Nickel, and three or four others--in a busy pedestrian area of a shopping center in Seattle. I sat there watching for about an hour, in a coffeeshop just next to the racks. What I observed both heartened me and raised a big question.

What was quite heartening is that the paper that was most picked up and kept by passers-by was this paper, the Washington Free Press. I had never imagined that this would be the case, with our comparatively small name recognition. Technically speaking, more people actually picked up the two large commercial weeklies in the area--the Seattle Weekly and the Stranger--but many of those same people returned the weeklies to the racks minutes later, after perhaps checking a calendar listing or a restaurant address. In contrast, none of the people who picked up the Washington Free Press returned it to the rack.

What I learned from this observation is that many people enjoy this publication if they get a chance to see it. This raised the big question: if people enjoy the Washington Free Press, then why is this publication so much smaller, with such a lower circulation than the big weeklies?

After mulling about this question, the answer occurred to me that the circulation of a paper has little to do with how much people like a publication, but has a lot to do with the commercial nature of the paper; in other words, the amount of advertising money a paper brings in is the crucial factor for its circulation, and a large circulation obviously influences a paper's public recognition and impact. Commercial papers have plenty of money for employing distributors, buying racks, and paying for saturated distribution over large geographic areas. In fact, they must do this simply to attain the circulation levels to justify their ad prices.

This presents a journalistic paradox. If people like and respond to a non-commercial progressive paper such as the Washington Free Press (which runs hardly any ads and does not actively try to sell ads), then how can a lot of people ever see such progressive journalism if a large circulation is dependent on large revenues from ads?

The first part of the answer lies in people realizing that standard commercial papers may be free or cheap for the reader, but they come at the great price of maintaining a culture of consumption. Just look at and feel the commercial weeklies or dailies. What portion of their weight consists of advertisements? What further portion consists of articles on things people buy or pay for, for example restaurant or movie reviews, and articles on cars, real estate, new gadgets, new pills or health treatments, airline travel destinations, etc. Let's be real to ourselves and realize that newspapers typically run a lot of stories for "people who buy" because that is what allows the papers to better sell ads. The result is skewed reality, a negative impact on our culture, the encouragement of unsustainable consumer lifestyles. There is, of course, in the commercial press too little criticism of the unsustainability of our current ways, and of the hollowness of our fixation on goods and pop-a-pill solutions. The commercial press--the practice of funding journalism chiefly by advertisements--is spiritually, intellectually, and emotionally toxic in ways that are parallel to our contaminated air, water, and food.

It seems that the desire of many progressives is that the owners of the commercial press should simply realize the truth and start printing more responsible journalism, such as more environment and labor coverage. Such naive progressives will also likely read the Washington Free Press with interest, but will not feel an urge to shift their loyalty (or their subscriptions) to such non-commercial alternative efforts because they don't understand the deeply ill dynamics of commercial media. They are enticed by the cheap or free prices of the large commericial papers (subsidized by ads, of course), and they are impressed by the large circulation sizes, the "mainstream" nature of the biggies. Sooner or later, these readers must one morning wake up to an understanding that the problems of environment and labor are the same as the problem of mainstream journalism: too much corporate influence.

The next step in bringing progressive journalism to more readers comes when people--such as yourself--support it. Advertisers--many of them large corporations--are what support the commericial press, and that is the problem. Instead, our culture needs journalism that is funded and supported and cared about by its own readers. When you buy a Washington Free Press subscription, there is much to care about. You are not only getting the paper mailed to you, you are also helping to fund the printing and mailing of thousands of copies that are distributed in sample bundles and delivered to homes and cafes all across Washington state. When alternative, non-commercial news gets out to those who it normally does not reach, you are slowly but surely getting a better society in the long run. Help our society get beyond the consumer "me" and start thinking about "we". Please donate to, volunteer for, and support the Washington Free Press.