Journalists baffled and concerned about secrecy in R-J sale

By Ric Anderson, Ray Brewer (contact)

Monday, Dec. 14, 2015 | 4:30 p.m.

Questions about who owns the Las Vegas Review-Journal and why they continue to refuse to come forward remained unanswered today, days after the publication sold for nearly $40 million more than the paper and its parent company sold for just nine months ago.

The sale has prompted speculation about who’s behind the purchase, but one name can be taken out of circulation: Brian Greenspun, owner, publisher and editor of the Las Vegas Sun.

“I already have a daily newspaper,” Greenspun said today, denying he was the new buyer.

Greenspun said the backers of News + Media Capital Group LLC, which made the purchase, hadn’t revealed themselves to him, even though the Sun is published and distributed under a joint operating agreement with the R-J. The Sun receives a portion of the R-J’s revenue under the agreement, which is regulated by the U.S. Department of Justice.

Greenspun said he has a good idea of the new owner’s identity.

New Media Investment Group, which paid $102 million for the holdings of the R-J’s parent company, Stephens Media, in March, will continue to run the organization’s day-to-day operations. It is a publicly traded company, which netted $37.5 million in accepting News + Media’s offer of $140 million.

“I don’t think the R-J has made appreciably more money in the last eight months than prior to the sale,” Greenspun said. “How do you justify that premium? If you really want that newspaper and are willing to overpay, that tells me it is someone who is very wealthy who doesn’t particularly care about money. Power? Maybe.”

Greenspun said he believed the owners’ identity eventually would become known. Media experts have been critical of the mystery owner, saying it could impact the R-J’s reputation in the community.

“It doesn’t seem right for an organization that is so interested in everyone else being open,” said Aly Colόn, Washington and Lee University’s Knight Professor of Media Ethics “The owner can set a standard or set a direction that can have an impact on the way the journalism is done. It may not be directly but each owner has his or her personality and orientation. I think it’s helpful for the public — the readers — to know what that is.”

Staff members of the R-J have raised similar concerns about their new owners’ refusal to identify themselves.

In a story Sunday, the Huffington Post posted tweets from staff members critical of the situation.

“I am just going to say it. I am personally offended & embarrassed that whoever bought the RJ does not have the guts to say so #whatthehell,” a tweet from Sean Whaley, a Carson City-based state government reporter, said. About an hour later, Whaley tweeted: “I have some stories to write Monday but I don’t know who I’m working for. I am not happy. #understatement #whatthehell.”

The Huffington Post story, written by senior media reporter Michael Calderone, went on to say:

“The new owner’s decision has put Review-Journal staffers in a tough spot. They could inadvertently create conflicts of interests by reporting on the undisclosed backers of their businesses. And Review-Journal reporters seeking more openness from government and the business community will have to contend with questions about lack of transparency in their own shop.

“In addition, there’s increasing uncertainty about what the Review-Journal can, and cannot, report about itself.”

That last line was in reference to an earlier Huffington Post story revealing that publisher Jason Taylor ordered quotes to be removed from an R-J story last week about the sale. One of those quotes was attributed to Michael Schroeder, a News + Media representative who made the sale announcement during a staff meeting.

“They want you to focus on your jobs … don’t worry about who they are,” Schroeder was quoted as saying in response to a question about the new ownership.

The other removed quote came from R-J Editor Michael Hengel, who posed questions about the ownership group and its expectations.

Staff member Eric Hartley, a local government reporter, tweeted a link to the Saturday story along with the comment, “This is simply wrong. As is the fact that no one knows who owns Nevada’s largest newspaper.”

Hartley posted an additional comment Sunday: “One of the problems with secrecy is that they could be affecting our work behind the scenes without us having any way to know.”

Schroeder told the Huffington Post today he had “absolutely no comment” on the situation. Also today, Review-Journal reporters launched a social media campaign urging new owners to come forward, using #ethics and posting links to the Society of Professional Journalists code of ethics.

“It causes people to imagine all kinds of things, some of which may be accurate and some of which I would imagine might be inaccurate,” Colόn said. “In a way, the lack of identity kind of sucks the identity out of the paper itself. People begin to think all kinds of things that may or may not be true because they don’t know what the facts are.”

The size of the offer and the timing of the sale, which Fortune magazine described as the “media world’s biggest mystery," has prompted some observers to question whether the new owner is motivated by political purposes. At the heart of those questions is Nevada’s position as a potential swing state in the 2016 presidential election, due to its balance of Republicans and Democrats as well as the potential of its growing Hispanic population to play a key role in determining the outcome of the race in Nevada.

Taylor told staff members that the new owners had assured him they would not meddle in editorial content. But by not disclosing the new owner’s identity you can argue they already are meddling.

“There’s a public trust between a media entity and its community,” said Roy Gutterman, director of the Tully Center for Free Speech at Syracuse’s journalism school. “From a readership standpoint, I would want to know who is behind the paper. You would think if you were buying something that high-profile, you would want people to know it is yours. Donald Trump puts his name on everything for a reason.”

Sun reporter Daniel Rothberg contributed to this story