Opinion: Legislators' columns have become more partisan, and newspapers should apply certain standards to them

By Al Cross

Director and Professor, Institute for Rural Journalism and Community Issues

With legislative activity ramping up in most states, there may be news in those columns that legislators send to newspapers in their districts. But there may also be invective and partisanship, and that makes them opinion, which should have a higher threshold for publication. Editors and legislators can take some lessons from the latest column by Reed Anfinson, publisher of the Swift County Monitor-News and two other weeklies in western Minnesota.

Reed Anfinson

Such columns "can be essential sources on legislation," lawmakers' personalities, and even reveal how they work with their colleagues, Anfinson writes, but in recent years the pieces "have become more about tearing down the opposing party and its members than informing constituents. . . . What we find strange with some of the columns we receive is they don’t reflect the character of people we’ve gotten to know."

Perhaps that's because such columns are often if not usually generated by staffs of party leadership offices and often get little if any editing from the legislators whose names are on them. If you really know your legislator, that may be easy to tell.

"We understand a politician’s column is an opinion piece," Anfinson writes. "However, there is a difference between explaining why you support or oppose specific legislation and writing with the sole purpose of vilifying its supporters, stoking fear and resentment. With the coarsening of political debate, we increase the potential for angry confrontations and violence against those whose beliefs don’t align with ours. We’ve seen the consequences in rising death threats against school boards, election workers, journalists, and opposing party members."

Anfinson quotes the late Mark Shields, a political reporter and commentator: “In every discussion, the person on the other side probably loves their country as much as you love our country; cares about their children’s and grandchildren’s future as much as you do; treasures the truth as much as you do,” so “You don’t demonize somebody on the other side.” Or you shouldn't.

"Community newspapers aren’t the mouthpiece for political action committees or political caucuses," Anfinson writes. "We sell advertising space for partisan promotion of political talking points. When we receive columns that grossly distort the truth, and are more interested in driving fear and anger, we won’t print them." He offers advice for legislators and letter writers:

• Communicate, don’t alienate.
• Respect all your readers, not just your political base or allies.
• Don’t give us only political-party talking points but also provide us with your ideas for strengthening our rural communities, protecting our health, and providing sound government financial management.

That's good advice. What about election time? My advice is that as elections approach, the hurdles to publication should be higher. When a legislator files for re-election, newsworthiness of a column should be the sole standard for publication. Accordingly, it may be better to write a news story about a legislator's stance than run the opinion piece. And I'd like to see newspapers set a dead period, perhaps within 60 days of an election, during which no such columns will be published. They're an easy way to fill an editorial page, but a newspaper shouldn't be an easy vessel for self-serving messages. Unless they're in an ad.