New Tool for Reporting on Politics and Money

The people at MAPLight.org have come up with yet another innovative reporting aid. The Committees Tool let's you look at key bills and see how much money different special interest groups have donated to committee members and who received the dough. Here's an example:

SPOTLIGHT on H.R. 5632, which would prohibit importation of radioactive waste, in the House Committee on Energy and Commerce
H.R. 5632 would effectively prohibit the importation of radioactive waste into the United States. Energy Solutions, a nuclear waste management company, is currently seeking a license from the Nuclear Regulatory Commission to import 20,000 tons of radioactive waste from Italy. Currently the bill has been stuck in the House Committee on Energy and Commerce and House Committee on Ways and Means since it was introduced on March 13, 2008. MAPLight.org's 'Committees Tool' reveals special interest money given to each member of these Committees. The nuclear plant construction, equipment & services industry, which is trying to block passage of the bill, has given John Dingell (D, MI-15), Chair of the House Committee on Energy and Commerce, $45,250. Environmental policy groups, which support passage of this bill, have given significantly less, just $3,760 to Dingell.

Pretty slick. Another benefit is that this isn't just for "political" reporters. I can think of a lot of reporting areas where this could help. For example, if you're covering an industry or specific company, or your beat is an area such as environmental, business, consumer, or the arts, the information here could be a great addition to a story on a topic or even provide a springboard for a story idea.

News and Photo Copyrights

There are some significant questions as to whether the press has a right to post the photos of the woman who allegedly had a sex for money relationship with former New York governor Elliot Spitzer. In my FotoCounty blog, I mention a piece in Photo District News as well as an angle that I haven't seen yet covered.

House Attempts to Change Copyright Protection

There's a bill in the U.S. House, sponsored by John Conyers of Michigan (D) and Lamar Smith of Texas (R), that, according to PC Magazine:

would further crack down on intellectual property violations, and create several new government positions with the power to enforce the new law.

Bill H.R. 4279 would create a special section in the Justice Department to deal with copyright violation and some provisions would add substantial powers to punish copyright violators, like seizing:

"any property used, or intended to be used, to commit or facilitate the commission of a violation … that is owned or predominantly controlled by the violator or by a person conspiring with or aiding and abetting the violator in committing the violation."

The DOJ is not fond of the measure, as it would force how they handled copyright infringement prosecution, though many business groups, particularly in movies and music, are soiling themselves in their collective excitement. But I'm not sure if the squeals of delight would continue if they thought through the problem and considered whether their own property might be impounded if they were violating copyright. Can you say massive numbers of web and database servers? But I suspect it's an issue of the sheerest optimism to think that any writer could get the powers that be to turn these penalties onto the business forces that lobby so heavily.

I also find it interesting that Conyers is involved. Could this be his mea culpa for sponsoring that bill, at the behest of the NWU/UAW, that would have allowed writers to take part in collective bargaining?

The NYT on Economics of Television and WGA Strike

The New York Tiems has some interesting pieces, with different takes, on the WGA strike, and I pass them along as worth reading. One, on how superstar producers, directors, and actors, are sucking much of the profit out of the movie system, may or may not be completely accurate. It's based on a report completed for an analyst firm, but by a former studio person, so there might be some bias in the analysis. Then again, it might be accurate.

This article shows how the image of Hollywood writers being highly paid is a generalization based on a few big names. Most writers, it asserts, are getting by, but hardly rolling in dough. And here's an article on how the writers are finding print and web outlets while they wait for their work to get back to the screen. Just what you wanted: more competition.

WGA Strike, Corporate Control, and Pushing Writers Out

I told myself that I'd take today off most of my blogs, including this one, but the writers' strike in Hollywood continues to beckon, and time is a-wastin'. Although most people reading this blog are unlikely to be WGA members, the strike and the issues there are important, because they tie in very closely to what freelance non-fiction writers are facing, often from the same large parent corporations.

The issue between them is that the writers want a share of the Internet revenue and the studios absolutely refuse, saying, "Oh, we're not making any money, it's just promotional." That is so much hogwash. They may be making little profit - though you never can tell with the accounting tricks studios are notorious for employing in their attempt to keep every possible dime - but they are making money. It may not be much in comparison to what they make through more traditional distribution, but it exists. If they get to distribute programming without a cut to the writers on the Internet now, because, hey, they said they weren't making anything, then that fiscal arrangement will never change.

That's the way the studios would like it. What happens when television is delivered over high speed Internet connections? Voila - no royalties to writers! What a way to boost the bottom line.

The problem, if you ask Alec Baldwin, is that Hollywood is largely in thrall to people who don't understand how to make compelling entertainment. They want guaranteed results without risk, which, in business, is like saying that you want to make scrambled eggs without cracking the shells. Shy of a science fiction novel - product of a writer, of course - in which you remove the egg through a fourth-dimensional twist past the three-dimensional shell, it simply will not happen. Business is the controlled use of risk to get a return on capital, and what makes it more dependable than out and out gambling is that you have people at the top who understand their businesses and how to make decisions that minimize risk and maximize pay-back.

To accuse writers of greediness for wanting to make a profit - as Damon Lindelof, co-creator of Lost, suggests - has a doubly-bitter irony. As Baldwin says, the studios are blaming the writers for their own screw-ups. In addition, they're trying to vilify the writers for wanting to make a profit, which is just the thing the studios are trying to do, only they want to increase their share by decreasing even the tiny portions going to others.

And now back to freelance writing as you and I know it. Publishers have been saying, "Oh, we can't pay for the web." As I've pointed out, that is nonsense. They're developing new publishing enterprises requiring investment. But because they hadn't been operating them at a profit (not sure that is true any longer), they wanted the writers to take give up their compensation. Do the web hosting companies provide bandwidth for reduced rates because they publishers are trying to start new types of businesses? Do they get free electricity and computers and storage and software? Nope, they don't - they have to pay for them. But without the content, they have nothing to store, to run through computers, to send over the Internet pipes, and to land in someone's browser.

They also want free use to adapt articles for television, to read entire books on satellite radio, and to do anything else that makes money. The publishers have two realistic choices, if they want to continue to have content that will actually attract people, and not crap churned out by people happy for their name printed somewhere, but who cannot deliver in the long term what makes for a working business model. They can give writers a cut of what they make, or they can pay writers enough up front that they can afford to be more generous with rights.

However, the current approach - saying "Sorry, but we need more and have to pay you less" - cannot work over the long run. Of course, by the time it gets really screwed up, upper management hopes to be out the door and into retirement, leaving the problems for the next generation, as well as the shareholders of the companies. Perhaps it's time for the shareholders to realize that although things may look good in the short run, they are going to be losing far more over the long term. Perhaps they should insist that many of the magazines, particularly the big consumer titles, stop burning money in all the ways they do that anyone who works there or deals with them knows. Paying the writers would be nothing in comparison, and the return could be tremendous.

Great Tools to Track Politics and Money

If you're writing about politics, public policy, legislation, regulation, industry, or social issues, there will come a time that you will want to follow the money, bills, and people. Here are some web resources that should make life a little easier:

• Follow the Money A resource for information on money in state politics. in a few clicks I was able to find how much money the currently Mass. governor received in campaign contributions. Note: if you're looking for a particular person, try the form last name, first name.


• OpenSecrets.org You may have run into this great site for national political contributions, but be sure to check the site index (under The Basics/About the Site). There's a lot here that you may not know exists, like the list of ambassadors and their political contributions.


• MAPLight.org This site shows connections between campaign donations and legislative votes, combining data on bills, legislative voting records, supporting and opposing interests for bills, and campaign contribution records.


• Fedspending.org A free database of government contracting and spending.


• GovTrack.us Search bills, votes, committee actions, and Congressional member profiles.


• LOUIS Search Congressional Reports, the Congressional Record, Congressional Hearings, the Federal Register, Presidential Documents, GAO Reports, and Congressional Bills & Resolutions.


• OpenCongress.org Shows bills, committees, and member profiles.


• Sunlight Foundation Has a great collection of online resources.


• FedStats Statistics from over 100 agencies.


• University of Michigan Library Documents Center A set of references for documents from local, state, federal, and foreign governments.