One way not to save your local newspaper is to pimp out your paper as a government propaganda agency. Let’s turn to Douglas County, Colorado:
Should a county government pay upwards of $350,000 to a local newspaper publisher to help the county spread “good news?”
That’s a question commissioners in conservative Douglas County just south of Denver were set to debate on Tuesday. They had received a proposal about it from Castle Pines Connection Publisher Terri Wiebold.
But at the last minute, the county leaders decided not to discuss it.
The decision followed local Colorado Community Media newspaper reporter Haley Lena “submitting several questions about the proposal,” Lena wrote this week. She added that a former commissioner, Lora Thomas, had also criticized the proposal in an online newsletter.
The development is notable because it involves public money intersecting with local journalism in an unusual way. And Wiebold, the newspaper publisher, told me over email this week that it was the county that actually came to her with the idea.
“When they approached me about potentially sharing our brand of good news and making a positive impact on more residents in Douglas County, I put together some ideas and numbers to explore those potentials,” she said.
…Here’s part of the official proposal the local newspaper publisher sent the county:
The Connection proposes a partnership with Douglas County to enhance the reach of County communications through our established legacy print publication with reliable and proven relationships and networks. The goal is to impact lives in positive and meaningful ways, building a stronger, happier and more informed and engaged Douglas County.
This partnership offers the County a cost-effective path to amplify County messaging and engage beyond digital and social media platforms without the need for additional County-operated staffing and distribution infrastructure. It also co-brands the County alongside compelling human-interest storytelling and quality journalism––all while fostering a sense of trust and belonging, improving mental health through community connection and a little good news.
The proposal dinged the county’s current communications strategy for not serving all communities, and Wiebold said the print medium is a particular limitation. The proposal boasts that the government could use the newspaper in part because “our longevity isn’t just about news—it’s about trust.”
For this “partnership,” the county would pay the newspaper between $175,000 to $350,000, Wiebold said [Corey Hutchins, “Colorado Newspaper Asks Local Government for $350K to Publish ‘Good News’,” Inside the News in Colorado, 2025.08.08].
“This partnership offers the County a cost-effective path to amplify County messaging—” I stop hard right there. The free press on which the authors of the First Amendment were counting does not exist to amplify government messaging. The free press exists to, among other things, tell citizens what their government is doing and what effects those doings are having on the community so that voters know whether they ought to keep voting for the government officials they have or throw them out and elect new ones. Government already has plenty of little taxpayer-funded drones like Ian Fury to amplify its message. Government can contract with a private firm to further amplify its message, but that private firm is no longer doing journalism; it is doing propaganda.
Any newspaper asking for any form of financial support, public or private, subsidy, subscription, or donation, must make clear to its funders that financial support does not buy editorial control. Supporters of real journalism don’t donate money to turn reporters into puppets. Supporters of real journalism contribute to a local paper or blog because they recognize that their local journalists are saying things that need to be said to sustain a healthy community. They recognize that, whether the things journalists say are pleasant or jarring, journalists provide a vital service to civic life and deserve to make a living for their community service. There may be a role for government to support local journalism, but that support must be completely hands-off, with no strings attached to what local journalists report.
Small-town publishers, I know you need to pay the bills. If turning to your local governments for subsidies is the only way you can pay those bills, and if the only way you can get those subsidies is by saying what your local government wants you to say, you are free to make that decision, but you will no longer be doing journalism. You’ll be a propaganda mill, and your town will still be a news desert.