https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=qV3gO3zxQ1g
Small-town papers are beholden to small-town interests. Stone notes that the large-city and national dailies (NY Times, Washington Post, LA Times, possibly the Boston Globe, the Wall Street Journal at the itme) were freed of dependence on any one advertiser (or political interest). That may have been a peculiar circumstance of the 1960s and 1970s.
> The president, irrespective of who he is, today, is so powerful that the temptations of the office for good or evil are too great for any one man. I think we ought to begin to dismantle the office. I think we ought to have a head of state symbolizing the country around whom the natural feeling of patriotism and reverence accrue and separate him from the head of the government.
In the large Midwestern cities in which I have lived, local newspapers generally choose to align themselves on the side of local governments and chambers-of-commerce on virtually every new development subsidy or tax deal regardless of the costs to be incurred by local residents and businesses and/or the sketchiness of the scheme.
Readers look to the fourth estate for a voice when elected representatives collude with special interests. If they are merely mouthpieces and cheerleaders for those in power, readers will look elsewhere or disengage.