The reason the great papers of old, like the Chicago Tribune, could provide a Chicago voice on national and global affairs was because they had people, like Richard Longworth, out across the country and the globe, finding and telling stories of the world through a Midwestern lens. The same was true, in their heyday, for papers in Detroit, St. Louis, Cleveland, etc.

Now? Forget about it.

Most Midwestern papers have one overworked Washington reporter and can afford – at best – just a handful of reporting trips a year. They focus on local because it’s where they have a competitive advantage.

In “new media,” absent what remains of print advertising revenue, this is even more true. Maybe a blogger from time to time can write about another city he/she visits. But that’s different than a sustained look at how their city fits into the global economy, informed by on-the-ground looks at those other global places. How are you supposed to meaningfully compare your city’s urbanity to Portland if you haven’t been there in six years?

I don’t know what the answer is. I hope we who care about Midwestern cities and journalism can figure it out.

But in the meantime, that national and global conversation is going to get more and more concentrated in the hands of a few national outlets, and this part of the world will have a harder and harder time getting its story heard.

Goes back to city leadership as Janette Sadik-Kahn points in your last post, and/or motive.

http://www.indystar.com/article/20100322/LOCAL18/3220332/Indy-defense-work-heads-to-Mexico