TheJoan Shorenstein Center PRESS. POLITICS 'PUBLICPOLICY' HarvardUniversity JohnF. KennedySchool ofGovernment INrnonucrIoN There is a large academic literature, some in sively on referendums and other forms of direct economics and some in philosophy, about the democracy,is that representativescan often status of people's revealed preferences, their temper the passionsof ephemeralmaiorities, and expressedstatements about what they desire.For can often exercise a healthy dampening effect on although there are obvious attractions to the idea the wide swings of unchecked maioritarianism. that we should always respectwhat people say When Madison in Federalist 10 distinguished a they want, the issue turns out to be more com- democracyfrom a republic, and when he advo- plicated. At times, what peopie say they want cated representativerepublicanism as a way of "mischiefs may not be what they would really prefer in the controlling the of faction," even long term or upon further reflection, as when when those mischiefs were producedby factions " peopleask for a third drink or a seconddessert that were comprised of. a maiority of the and shortly thereafter wish that their wishes had whole," he recognizedthe importance of struc- not been granted.Consider Ulysses,who had turing government so that it could, when neces- himself bound to the mast for precisely this sary, limit the abusesof pure majoritarianism. reason."...but you must bind me hard and fast, This limitation may come from representative so that I cannot stir from the spot where you will rather than direct democracy,it may come from stand me...and if I beg you to releaseme/ you a system of separationof powers and checks and must tighten and add to my bonds." (The Odys- balances,and it may come from a written sey).As the current debatesabout a balanced constitution with judicial review, but each of budget amendment to the Constitution indicate, these devicesis premised on the insight that today as well as in Homer's time we worry that there is more to governmental design than getting what we now say we want may causeus simply reflecting the revealedpreferences of regret in the future. today's transient maiority. Even when revealedpreferences do reflect It is often thought, and properly so, that.the what people in fict want,'people'swants may presscan (and should) serveas a central compo- not always reflect what is best for them. Even nent of a well-functioning democracy.The when well-informed of the consequences,peQple power of the presscan at times help to check may prefer to smoke'cigarettes,to drive cars abusesof official power, and even more impor- without wearing their seatbelts,to ride motor- tantly it can serveas the forum for public delib- cycles without wearing helmets, and to forego eration and'communication when the decision- higher education in favor of becoming part of the making body is a population of over two hundred entourageof a rock band. million rather than the severalhundred of the Yet there is still more to the problem than stereotlpical New England town meeting. Yet if this. Even when revealedpreferences track the pressis to be seen,in part, as one of the actual preferences,and even when preferences devicesof democracy,then all of the reasonsfor match interests,giving effect to the preferences thinking carefully about the distinction between and interests of the maiority may not always be a well-functioning democracy,on the one hand, the right thing to do. The reasonwe recognize and pure majoritarianism, on the other, are as international human rights, and the reasonwhy applicable to the pressas to the other institu- domestic constitutions protect rights like tions that concernedfames Madison and his freedom of religion and freedom from torture, is colleagues. that sometimes it is simply wrong to fail to When we think of the pressin Madisonian recognizethe rights that people have, even when republican, rather than in pure majoritarian, recognition of those rights is inconsistent with terms/ a different conception of pressresponsibil- the actual interests of the majority. ity is before us. And when we recognizethe close Each of these complications castsdoubt on affinity between the concernsof Madison and institutions designedexclusively to reflect the the concernsof those who from classicalto revealedpreferences and interests of the maior- present times have reflected on the problems ity. One of these institutions is a completely accompanyingthe simple satisfaction of all laissez-fairemarket as a way of allocating goods revealedpreferences/ we can seeas well that a and services.And another is an unalloyed pressthat measuresits responsibilities solely in majoritarianism as away of making political terms of satis{ying the revealedpreferences (and decisions.One of the virtues of a representative passions,as Madison would say)of its readers democracy,rather than one that relies exclu- may fall short o{ fulfilling the role that the press can and should serve in a representative democ- risks that Madison saw in pure majoritarianism racy. To put it more simply, if democracy works in 1787,and all of the risks that many people see best when majoritarianism is tempered with less in excessreliance on referendums and citizen majoritarian institutions, then the press may initiatives in the present political climate. For serve democracy best when it seesitself as doing her, this worry is a worry about whether a press something more than iust reacting to the imme- that takes its agendasfrom reader surveys and diate and revealed preferencesof its readers. focus groups is a press that is fulfilling its role in Indeed, given that a desire for profit-maximtza- the mediated majoritarianism we call American tion may itself be away of allowing voters to democracy.The phenomenon that Carper vote with their wallets, a newspaper or magazine questions is undeniably growing, and her that tries to maximize its profits and in addition thoughtful and provocative discussion paper tries to provide the news that its readers believe should be required reading for all who too "what they want is likely to be a newspaper or maga- quickly think that the readerswant" is zine that represents just what Madison and the prescription for effective journalism. others had sought to avoid in the design of governmental institutions. Frederick Schauer The argument I have foreshadowed in the Acting Director, The |oan ShorensteinCenter on previous paragraph is not mine, but that of the Press,Politics and Public Policy Alison Carper, a former reporter for Newsday Frank Stanton Professorof the First Amendment who was a Fellow of the Shorenstein Center in fohn F. Kennedy School of Government the Spring of. 1994. Reacting to the increasing Harvatd University use in contemporary journalism of reader sur- veys and focuJgroups to determine what the people "teaLly" want, she worries that this approach to journalism brings with it all of the PAINT.BY.NUMBERS JOURNALISM How ReaderSurveys and Focus Groups Subvert a Democratic press I. the purpose of their profession.Like all joumalists, |ournalism in America has always had two they have been schooledin the traditions of free warring halves. On the one side, it is a public speech,and they know that this liberty they enjoy service, armed with staunch principles about the is preservedby the Constitution for one reason: people'sright to know. On the other, it is a Newspapersinform the citizenry, and in a democ- business,invigorated by hearty profits or by racy, citizens must be inlormed in order to fulfill profits'allure. Its successhas always depended the demands of self-govemance. on keeping both halves strong/ becausea wound In recent years,then, these editors have faced to one side - principles or financial strength- a need to reconcile two objectives,the fulfill- debilitates the other. ment of their democratic function, and the Yet, in the past 30 years or so, the business assuranceof their own survival. As a result, they side of journalism has assumedan unyielding have found strong iournalistic justifications for dominance. Newspapers across the country have using marketing techniques to shapethe news. been sold by families to corporations.Motivated In this essay,I will try to show how the by the medium's potential for profits, executives reasoningof these journalists fails to rise above of these corporationshave strived to make each the level of mere rutionalization; that, in fact, quarter's earningsexceed the last. They have when their arguments are scrutinized it becomes struggledto pleaseshareholders. They have c,learthat the goalsof marketing are largely in labored to make circulation figures meet their conflict with the role that the pressshould play guaranteesto advertisers,They have fretted in a democracy. about the cost of newsprint and delivery. In more recent years,however, the executives, concernshai'e changed.Rather.than worry about II. profitability, they have become anxious about |ournalism's adoption of marketing tech- their ir\dustry's very survival. The reabonsfor . niques has affectednearly every newspaperin this shift are not hard to discern. America. ' Recessionshave undermined the stability of In some cased,editors call upon focus groups newspapers'advertising base. New sourcesof for guidance.Sitting behind one-way mirrors, information and entertainment have drawn they listen to comments about their newspaper subscribersaway. And, most ominously, a by a dolen or so readersor "potential,, readers. declining regard for the written word has