The American West's 285 daily English-language newspapers simply aren't making the grade when it comes to providing the public what it needs to know about large-scale population, economic, and environmental forces "transforming the character of the region and its communities."

That is a basic conclusion of perhaps the single most comprehensive analysis of daily newspapers' reporting on growth and development in the American West. "Journalism isn't doing its part for the West nearly as well as it could and should," conclude the authors of the newly released Matching the Scenery: Journalism's Duty to the North American West, a report by the Institutes for Journalism & Natural Resources (IJNR) based in Bozeman, Montana.

"Most western dailies have the financial means, if not the will, to do this job," says the IJNR report, saying "a large majority of these newspapers consistently make a healthy profit."

The 136-page report says that more than four out of five of the western dailies are short on reporters; three-quarters of them don't provide sufficient time for their reporters to do the job they say needs to be done; and more than half of the dailies have no reporter assigned to cover environment, natural resources or growth at least one-third of the time.

Using what it acknowledges as a qualitative and "inherently subjective" set of evaluation criteria, the study says that 20 percent of the North American West's dailies "consistently did a good or excellent job of covering the complex and related subjects of growth, development, and the environment," with "only a small majority" consistently doing an excellent job. "The rest of the time, we found, the coverage typically being produced by these newspapers fell short of the rating of 'good.' "

The study, funded largely by the William and Flora Hewlett Foundation (see note) outlines various criteria by which the newspapers' performance was measured: accuracy and clarity, significance and relevance, frequency and persistence, prominence and proportionality, credibility and context. While acknowledging outstanding instances of daily newspaper journalism on these issues, the study concludes that most newspapers in the West "are neglecting to cover the 'big story' and that most simply "don’t cover this story often or well." One result: deprived of information and insights that could help lead to more responsible decisions on the region's future.

Many environmental journalists may recognize the study's recommendations for improving reportage on environmental, economic, and growth issues: more reporters given more time and more space to better address important, ambitious, and often complicated issues; more training for reporters and editors; improved workplace conditions to help retain "accomplished" veteran reporters who can share their knowledge and experience; and more risk-taking when it comes to telling the story of growth, development and the environment.

As things now stand, the IJNR report concludes, journalism at most western newspapers "only nibbles at the edge of the biggest western story of all: population growth."

"The phenomenon of population growth affects newspaper readers' everyday lives more than tax increases, regulatory legislation, distant wars, perhaps more than sports," the authors lament.

A common complaint the authors heard in their travels to newsrooms throughout the West was that even the relatively few reporters designated as "environmental reporters" often end up being responsible for at least one additional beat. "Hundreds of interviews convinced us that many former and current environmental reporters in the West have felt unsupported and unappreciated by the management at their newspapers."

Pointing to what some might consider a "brain drain" from the environmental beat, the IJNR authors maintain that "No reporting assignment in the West is more stressful or more frustrating than the environment beat.

"Becoming proficient in the subject matter takes years," they say, and the issues themselves have become increasingly complex and confrontational in recent years, with sources more savvy "and sometimes more manipulative."

They acknowledge what they describe as "the pervasiveness" of the perception that environment reporters "bring bias into their work" -- in effect, that they are environmentalist reporters and not simply reporters covering the environment beat.

Addressing the journalists' own responsibilities in covering the beat knowledgeably, the IJNR report authors say, "To ensure balance in an environment story, simply quoting the opposing sides isn't sufficient. This shortcut only deprives readers of a journalist's considered judgment and of a competent basis for reaching their own conclusions .... Readers want accuracy and fairness. But they also want clear, independent analysis. And independent analysis is not the equivalent of bias."

In a "Profits and Paychecks" chapter, IJNR looks at salaries paid in 2001 to everyone from entry-level reporters for dailies with less than 10,000 circulation ($20,437) to experienced reporters for 100,000 to 150,000-circulation dailies ($43,557) and more. They say that latter annual salary is "roughly the same amount as the average truck driver, according to the American Trucking Associations."

Single copies of the study -- Matching the Scenery: Journalism's Duty to the North American West -- are available for $12, including shipping, from IJNR, P.O. Box 1996, Missoula, MT. 59806. The price is $10 per copy for orders of five to 19, and $8 for orders of 20 or more.

*The Metcalf Institute for Marine and Environmental Reporting, publisher of Environment Writer, receives financial support from the William and Flora Hewlett Foundation's population program. (Return to story)