Advocacy and Infrastructure

Abstract

In June 2011, Wisconsin's legislative committee drafted a budget measure that would have eliminated the University of Wisconsin's participation in WiscNet, a nonprofit cooperative providing high-speed internet access to schools, libraries, and hospitals. Without the university, many feared WiscNet would dissolve, leaving its members with slower, more expensive broadband. The case proved politically heated, eventually leading to a two-year postponement after protests to legislators. But the case also proves useful as a window into the role of newspapers in supporting the information needs of communities. Newspapers do not merely serve as information providers, but also play a role as advocates within the public sphere. They define important issues facing communities and advocate for the best means to address those issues. In so doing, they adhere to social responsibility principles and fulfill part of journalism's ethical role within democracy. Broadband access is a critical issue facing communities. Access divides across urban, suburban, and rural areas, and across socioeconomic layers and raises questions about equality in civic participation, education, health care, and employment. Digital infrastructure is a key piece of a vibrant community. This essay examines community newspaper coverage concerning the WiscNet debate and broadband infrastructure generally. It weighs how news organizations addressed questions of access and cost, as well as how editorial advocacy reflects support for robust digital infrastructure. The WiscNet debate served as a moment for community newspapers to advocate for efficient and effective infrastructure, but nearly all communities found this advocacy lacking.

KEYWORDS:

• broadband
• community newspapers
• ethics
• public sphere
• social responsibility

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

The author wishes to express gratitude to Prof. Susan J. Robinson for expert editing and theoretical guidance on this essay, as well as Emily Genco for database query support.

Notes

1. An exact count of stories in the seven state papers owned by Gannett was not possible because of its archiving procedures.