The Media

The Media

By TOM LITTLEWOOD

Is
freedom
of
the
press
rent
free
?

THE OLD-TIME government building pressroom was a venerable if unsanitary institution, complete with lewd pictures on the walls and hangers-on handicapping the cockroach races through the wastepaper littering the floor. It was a place for reporters to hang their hats, phone their offices, and stay out of the hair of the wheeler-dealers in the hallways.

But that's all part of the past. Today's press suites look more like stockbrokers' offices. Indeed there are few if any press facilities anywhere in the country more luxurious than those provided by the taxpayers of Illinois at the statehouse. The quarters were remodeled in 1976 at a cost of about $1 million. The "regulars" occupy 16 rent-free, private offices equipped with stylish desks, chairs, carpeting, couches and other furniture. Another large room is available for the television filming of news conferences. Three attendants oversee the pressroom, and even though they are responsible to the Illinois Legislative Correspondents Association (ILCA), the reporters' self-governing mechanism, they are on the payroll of the Secretary of State, the custodian of the statehouse.

This public subsidy is troubling to many journalists in Springfield and elsewhere. The Wall Street Journal, the

Washington Post, CBS News, and the Knight-Ridder newspapers all made voluntary payments of $1,000 or $1,250 to the U.S. Treasury to help defray the cost of their office space and supplies in federal buildings this year. The press corps either pays rent or has chosen housing outside the statehouse in California, Florida, Texas and Louisiana.

Here in Illinois, a representative of Gannett newspapers suggested at the 1978 annual meeting of the ILCA that a study be conducted of the feasibility of either voluntary or mandatory rental payments by news organizations using the facilities. The resolution was defeated, 10 to 7. Alan Dixon, the secretary of state, said he would not accept voluntary rental contributions, like those made in Washington, because "it is not in the public interest and would be an infringement on the First Amendment."

Though Gannett is strongly in favor of paying its way, another profitable chain, the Copley newspapers, which include The State Journal-Register in Springfield, are opposed. The Associated Press is in favor, but the other wire service, United Press International, voted against the study. The Chicago Sun-Times supported the idea, but the Chicago Tribune is opposed to pressroom rent. (The Tribune Co. earned net income in the first quarter of 1979 of$13 million, up from $8.9 million a year earlier.)

Hostage value
At this year's session of the General Assembly, Rep. LeRoy Van Duyne (D., Joliet), who had been taken to task by the Copley paper in his city of Joliet for the post-election legislative pay raise, moved to settle the issue by enacting a law requiring that the media pay. His bill was cleared by the House Executive Committee, but instead of being brought to the floor for a vote one way or the other, it was held over until next year and thus is technically still alive.

In the minds of some legislators perhaps the bill has hostage value as a reminder to the press of their generosity. Any day a politician can do a for a reporter is considered a day well spent; and all good reporters know their beneficent friends are a much greater threat to their independence than are their clamoring critics.

Ben Kiningham, a reporter for 33 radio stations who says his service couldn't afford the rent, is worried about something else. "What if we pay rent and then the legislators don't like something we report?" he asks. "Might they not come and double or triple the rent on us?"

Ransom payment
A more crucial question is whether the fee would inhibit smaller news papers and broadcasting stations from sending reporters to Springfield occasions sionally. David West, manager of the Illinois Press Association, believes that some of the smaller media would "pack up and leave." He saw the Van Duyne bill as an opportunity for legislaitors who were wounded by the pay raise ruckus to "get their licks in."

My own view is that the media which staff the statehouse the year around should reimburse the state a reasonable fee for their office space, janitorial telephone and other utility services. The statehouse press would be well-advised not to bank on the goodness of any secretary of state. Payments could be scaled according to office size and the circulation or broadcasting power of the tenant company. Ideally, a committee independent of both press corps and government would administer the payment system.

At the same time there should continue to be shared facilities — a "common" room or rooms as there are now — available with telephones and typewriters for reporters whose employers either cannot afford the fee or assign staff members to Springfield only sporadically. The issue is too important to be tossed into the political kettle every session. It ill behooves companies the size of the Tribune and Copley to snip away at the perquisites of public office while they themselves are subsidized in such lavish fashion by the taxpayers.

34/ October 1979/ Illinois Issues