Joint operating agreements

This is one of the dirty secrets in the newspaper wars -- the Joint Operating Agreements where rival newspapers continue to publish and share advertising revenue. The theory behind it is that the public benefits from having more than one newspaper in a city. The actuality is that the free market determines should what the public wants. They don't, for instance, want the Denver Post, hence a JOA with the Rocky Mountain News. The same with the Seattle Times and the Seattle Post-Intelligencer.

The JOA concept is a little flawed. For one, it effectively excudes real competition in advertising rates and ensures a monopoly for the two papers, excluding any rivals from starting up. At worse, it guarantees that neither newspaper is responsive to their audience. Newspaper labor unions, of course, have a vested interest in supporting JOAs in order to maintain jobs. The biggest loser, however, is the public. They dont' get two newspapers: they get one Soviet-style subsidized rag and one they really want to read and support. And the unions throw in free strikes to try to cripple those with whom they aren't ideologically aligned. That's an added inducement to join a JOA, too.

JOAs in 2000. In 2003. And in 2004. In January 2004 the Cincinnati Post announced they would end the cozy Joint Operating Agreement that has made Cincinnati into a ghetto where every policeman is a despised "cop" and there are daily accusations of racism to feed the paranoia of the city captives, culminating in media-induced racial riots on a regular basis.

In Denver, amid much ado, the Rocky Mountain News concluded in an article about their JOA,

Neither newspaper nor owner enjoys a financial advantage as a result of the JOA. Scripps and MediaNews each receive 50 percent of the JOA's profits.

To which we might add, whether they deserved it or not.