Civic Journalism: Six Case Studies
MADISON, WIS.
"We the People, Wisconsin"

The First Event

The March 1992 event whetted their appetite for more and Iverson approached Still about keeping it going. Seven months later, town hall meetings in the U.S. Senate race were held. Since then, the partnership has produced several civic journalism efforts every year.

Still had been the State Journal's chief political writer when in 1985 he took over the editorial page; he became associate editor in 1990. In addition to editorials, Still has written a syndicated weekly political column for the past decade. He came to civic journalism out of a concern about what he saw as deeply rooted cynicism among participants in the political process and a sense of alienation between the public, the press and the politicians. "I was part of the problem," he said. "I think the public had come to view journalists as being part of this large conspiracy to cut them out of the political dialogue."

To Iverson, "We the People" is "following the most traditional definition of journalism possible, which is the public's right to know. We're just going about it in a somewhat different way. We're giving people the chance to know things first hand. We're letting people ask the kinds of questions they want to ask."

The State Journal and Wisconsin Public Television were a good match.

"I wouldn't initiate a project like this without a really strong broadcast or print partner," Still said. "We've discovered the whole of our effort is greater than the sum of our individual parts."

Iverson agreed. "Public TV is not very powerful on its own. It can become exponentially more powerful if it's hooked up with other entities."

Both realized right away they'd need more than a strong print-broadcast partnership. "It seems to me that one of the reasons we're unique is that the Wood Communications Group was in on this from Day One," Still said.

Wood's staffers distribute participant and media packets, handle all the event details, and collect feedback.

Wood said he has watched many ambitious projects fall apart without the right logistical support. "The real danger lies in media people sitting around and saying, 'Oh, wow, let's put on a show'," he said.

Even so, all involved acknowledge that teaming newspapers and broadcasters with a public relations firm would not work for every civic journalism project. Wood's reputation and his relationships with the Madison media fit in with "We the People," but not every town has a Jim Wood who transcends the usual distrust the press has for public relations. Also, not every town has a public relations or special events firm willing to work for convictions instead of profit.

"If you had told me five years ago that I would have turned in a meeting and asked someone who's the head of a public relations firm what he thought of a format idea, I would have said, 'You're batty.' You know, I just wouldn't have done it," Iverson said. "And -- what's more -- I would have thought it was unethical and sort of contrary to most of what journalists like to think they do.

"So, you have to learn to begin to realize that good ideas can pop up in different places."

Sponsors began underwriting the effort in late 1992 but each media partner makes a major contribution. Even now, Wood's firm, for instance, only receives about 30 cents for every dollar he could bill a typical client. The money is distributed on a formula based on the cost of a particular program and the participation of each partner in that program.

The total estimated cost of "We the People" since 1992 is about $425,000; about 54 percent of that has been borne by the partners. The partial reimbursements are a way to ensure that the financial impact on each partner is managed. "If you don't, eventually the project will not continue," said Wood.

To help offset some of the costs, Wood has raised about $265,000 from sponsors as diverse as the Miller Brewing Co., Wisconsin Manufacturers & Commerce, and The Wisconsin Education Association Council. Roughly half of that has been raised for the 1995 series of topics alone, signaling the growing impact of the initiative.

At first, sponsors were recruited one project at a time. In 1994, though, the partners decided to try to recruit five major sponsors, who would contribute $30,000 each a year. With that kind of budget, the partners wouldn't have to scramble to raise funds for every program. The first year they recruited three sponsors who contributed $30,000 apiece and one at $15,000. Sponsors below the "major" level are acknowledged by the phrase "with additional funding by... ."