Connect with us

Rural America

Newspaper For Sale: The Growing Threat of News Deserts in Western Pennsylvania



For the better half of the last decade, newspapers have been treated as novelties. An under-appreciated resource whose disappearance is problematic, but for reasons that are seemingly pragmatic. To make matters worse, there doesn’t appear to be a solution in sight.

“No one is quite sure how to stop that process from happening,” University of Iowa professor David Ryfe said of the dying local paper. “There are lots of people who are worried about it, but no one has found a solution in the 15 years [since] the digital world has erupted and called attention to the issue. No one has found a solution at the regional or local level.”

Ryfe is the director at University of Iowa’s School for Journalism and Mass Communication. He is also one of the most prominent scholars on local and modern journalism, authoring 2016’s “Journalism and the Public” and 2012’s “Can Journalism Survive: A Look Inside American Newsrooms.”

“All the local newspapers have left is the local advertising,” Ryfe said. “There’s not going to be any salvation for newspapers in multimedia, in digital media, or online.”

According to a 2018 Pew Research Study, weekday newspaper circulation in 1990 was around 62 million nationwide. That number dropped to 55.7 million in 2000 and in 2017 the estimated circulation suffered another decline, topping out at just 30.9 million.

As circulation has declined, local newspapers have had to adjust for the loss in revenue, sometimes by shrinking the size of their staffs, sometimes by selling out or closing up shop all together. 

The Greater Pittsburgh Area is witnessing this potentially dangerous trend firsthand. The area has lost 5 daily newspapers since 2015, with a host of others changing ownership. These changes pose a great risk in both the quality and quantity of local content.

The Downsizing of Pittsburgh’s Local News

Although changes in southwestern Pennsylvania’s newspaper industry have been happening for years, they came to a head in August when the area’s largest newspaper, the Pittsburgh Post-Gazette, announced the 232-year-old institution would stop printing on Tuesdays and Saturdays, bestowing Pittsburgh with the rather misfortunate honor of becoming the largest city in America without a daily print newspaper, although the publication offers a daily online edition.

Over the last three years, a number of daily and weekly newspapers in the surrounding area have also undergone changes.

In 2015, the Daily News in McKeesport and the Valley Independent in Monessen were among the first local papers in the region to cease operations. Both daily newspapers were owned by Trib Total Media, however, it was unable to find a buyer for either publication amidst a fire sale of local newspapers that year.

The company sold 8 publications in 2015, including the Leader Times in Kittanning and the Daily Courier in Connellsville, to West Penn Media, an affiliate of Sample Media Group which has an already established footprint in the area, publishing the Latrobe Bulletin in Westmoreland County.

Within less than a year from the start of its sell-off, Trib Total Media’s largest daily, the Pittsburgh-based Tribune-Review, would cease daily print operations and move to a solely digital platform in December 2016. The Pittsburgh City Paper, an alt-weekly, would also be purchased by the Butler, Pennsylvania, based Eagle Media Corporation that same year.  

The exterior of the Beaver County Times. Photo: David Smith/100 Days in Appalachia

In 2017, Calkins Media, headquartered in Pennsylvania, followed in Trib Total Media’s footsteps selling off its local publications. The Ellwood City Ledger and Beaver County Times became properties of GateHouse Media, a division of New Media Investment Group — the largest publisher in the nation today.

Calkins would also sell the Uniontown Herald-Standard to Ogden Newspapers Inc., a West Virginia-based company with more than 3,500 employees at its more than 40 daily papers. Recently Ogden, announced the purchase of the Washington Observer-Reporter from the Observer Publishing Company. With this purchase Ogden now controls the two largest daily newspapers within Washington, Fayette and Greene counties.

But the selling of small town and regional papers to national media companies isn’t specific to southwestern Pennsylvania. According to a 2016 study by the University of North Carolina, the 3 largest investment groups at the time — New Media, Digital First, and Gannett —  own a combined 900 newspapers in the U.S. with a circulation of 12.7 million.

So, Why Does Newspaper Ownership Matter?

As these local papers are gobbled up by out-of-town companies, things start to change, according to Ryfe.

“The first thing that happens is there is correspondingly less local news that is published in the newspaper,” he said, which he explained is largely the result of downsizing in newsrooms.

UNC’s 2016 report attempts to explain why that’s happening. Researchers found many of these investment groups purchase newspapers that are in debt. In acquiring these debts, the investors usually employ a formulaic approach to management, which is focused on cutting spending and trimming budgets through “laid off staff, frozen wages, reduced benefits and consolidated sales and editorial functions.”

Rebecca Devereaux, 25, experienced the cost cutting measures brought on by a newspaper’s sale firsthand when she worked for Uniontown’s Herald-Standard.

Two employees at the Herald-Standard hug the day the paper’s entire visual media department was laid off in 2017. Photo: Rebecca Devereaux

A multimedia editor, Devereaux was hired by the paper, which was then owned by Calkin Media, to help increase its video and digital storytelling capabilities, but in 2017, the Herald-Standard was abruptly sold to Ogden. Devereaux was notified of the sale via email while she was on vacation.

“We didn’t know the paper was for sale, at least at my level we didn’t know,” Devereaux said. “It was very sudden.”

Under Ogden, the paper’s entire visual media department was let go, leaving one of Devereaux’s colleagues to ask: “Who is going to hire a 60-year-old photographer?” she recalled.

Since 2004, employment in the newspaper industry has dipped by 45 percent. In 2017, 39,210 individuals worked in the industry, according to the Bureau of Labor Statistics.

Reductions in staffing and consolidations of departments, or the outsourcing of certain newspaper functions, are meant to help the papers climb out of debt and start generating a profit, even if short-term, but the UNC study says those “profits derived from the cost-cutting have not been reinvested to improve their newspapers’ journalism, but [are] used instead to pay loans, management fees and shareholder dividends.”

Ryfe acknowledged this profit-driven approach can create a dangerous problem not just for those working in the industry, but also their readers. As more newspapers are absorbed into larger corporations, the coverage turns away from local issues and instead becomes nationalized.

“There used to be a mediating layer of political conversation that was local that had to do with potholes in the street and where to put the waste management facility, very basic problems,” Ryfe said. “The loss of that level of news has contributed to polarization and partisanship at the national level. All politics have become national, strangely enough, as this has happened.”

Ryfe warns the reduction of local reporters covering local government, keeping an eye on the inner workings of a community, can prevent the misuse of power– even if covering a city council meeting may seem trivial to the average person.

“The fact of a journalist being on the beat tends to reduce the amount of political corruption,” he said. Fewer local  journalists could lead to more substandard or negligent decision making from government officials, Ryfe added.

The Creation of News Deserts in Rural Markets

As newspapers downsize or dissolve altogether, an information gap is created, especially in rural communities where access to information doesn’t come as easy as in the nation’s more urban areas.

Metro markets usually have a surplus of news outlets, but also have something many rural communities do not — access to reliable, high speed internet that makes gathering news and information quick and accessible.

According to a 2018 Federal Communications Commission (FCC) report, 68.6 percent of residents in rural areas are without broadband capabilities that meet federal guidelines for minimum upload and download speeds. This includes counties in western Pennsylvania where local news is declining, like Washington, Butler and Fayette. Approximately 14.9 million Americans are without access to high speed internet today.*

The 2016 UNC study highlights an earlier FCC report that found only 10 percent of evening television news shows are committed to local or regional news. In addition, “fewer than 40 percent of residents live in an area where they can receive all-news radio,” leaving newspapers, as sometimes, the only source of local news in rural areas.  

This creates the risk of “news deserts,” or, “places that have such a small market they can support relatively little news at all. And don’t have much news provided for them,” according to Ryfe.

Ryfe acknowledged the internet isn’t the main cause of the daily newspaper’s death and the rise of these coalescing media companies, however, it “exacerbated and accelerated it.”

*In 2015 the FCC Broadband Progress Report raised the minimum download speeds from 4 Mbps to 25 Mbps and minimum upload speeds from 1 Mbps to 3 Mbps. At the time it tripled the number of American households without internet access.

In a Digital World, Local Papers Are Doubling Down on Print

With strained internet access in some rural communities, it may make sense for local newsrooms to focus on the traditional print medium. After all, a 2018 Pew Research study found newspapers still make significantly more revenue from the print advertisements on their pages than on digital platforms — 56 percent of their revenue, according to the study.

But for Mike Palm, the executive editor of Uniontown’s Herald-Standard, his paper is choosing print for a different reason: competition.

“When you’re trying to compete in a digital world, you’re competing with more [media outlets]. The Tribune, the Post-Gazette, all the TV stations, the Observer-Reporter — in the digital realm all those become competitors,” Palm said, speaking before his paper’s owner, Ogden, purchased the Washington Observer-Reporter last week.

“In the newspaper realm — in hard copy– we have competitors, but in this area, there’s not much,” he said.  

Palm’s publisher, Michael Scott, has been with Ogden for 19 years and believes Ogden made the right decision, albeit through a series of difficult choices, when they changed their priorities from online back to print after buying the paper in 2017. That’s when Rebecca Devereaux and her colleagues in the visual media department were let go.

Uniontown’s Herald-Standard publisher Michael Scott. Photo: David Smith/100 Days in Appalachia

“Calkins [Media] was focused on digital,” Scott said, referring to the paper’s previous owner, “and we’re focused on print. Having a good, solid print product, it comes with a good, solid business model where digital does not, and in order to keep the content the level we firmly believe we should be at for a local newspaper, we need to be [in] print.”

Scott estimated the Herald-Standard’s current circulation to be approximately 50,000 and said they have 115 distribution racks throughout their coverage area. Calkins Media had previously removed all of the racks.

Photo: David Smith/100 Days in Appalachia

Scott believes newspapers made a mistake when “they offered their product for free” online. Yet, paywalls have not proven to be the answer for rural markets either.

“Newspapers have not made money online. Their revenues have been flat as a whole and that includes the larger regional newspapers like the Boston Globe and Dallas Morning News,” Ryfe said.

According to the Pew Research Center’s 2016 State of the Media Report, weekday print circulation in 2015 still made up 78 percent of a newspaper’s distribution. Fifty-one percent of adults who choose to read a newspaper do so in a print-only format, compared to 5 percent who prefer digital-only.

But those findings aren’t conclusive for the industry as a whole. In the same report, Pew found audiences are still gathering a large portion of their news from online sources when compared to the print newspaper. Regardless of whether a consumer first saw an article on Facebook, Twitter, Instagram, or LinkedIn, only 20 percent of the original content came from a daily newspaper, while 25 percent came from radio and 28 percent came from digital publications and apps.

While the Herald-Standard is doubling down on print, its neighbors to the north like the Pittsburgh Post-Gazette and the Pittsburgh Tribune-Review are betting on digital, but author and New York University journalism professor Samuel Freedman said those publications will have to find a way to make readers want to pay.

“You need to make the content strong enough that people want to pay for it,” Freedman said of the success of online paywalls. “What can you provide to your [readers and advertisers] that they can’t get anywhere else?”

The Counter Argument

With all of the external pressures on the industry, whether a newspaper is family-owned or held by an investment firm can be irrelevant. Statistics may indicate a reduction in the size of local newsrooms and, in turn, a reduction in local news coverage when they’re gobbled up by larger corporations, but that isn’t always the case.

“There’s nothing magical about local ownership,” Freedman said. “It is about who owns the paper. [The] problem isn’t that they’re outsiders, it is if there’s no commitment towards journalism.”

A former New York Times columnist and reporter, Freedman pointed to billionaire Glen Taylor who bought Minneapolis’ Star-Tribune as an owner who has aggressively worked to grow the audience of his paper, vowing to make it a “statewide” publication.  

Freedman agreed that there should be concern over media conglomerates buying up all of the publications in one geographic area, since history has shown they often have the “short-term” goal of debt cutting rather than growth. But as a former writer for New Jersey’s Courier News, owned by Gannett and part of the USA Today Network, Freedman said his own experience wasn’t that of drastic cuts.

“Everyone hated Gannett [at the time], but we were never removed [from a job] and were never strained for resources,” Freedman said.

Some local newsrooms today are finding benefits to being owned by the same large media company. Ellwood City Ledger managing editor Patrick O’Shea noted he utilizes a type of “network journalism” with the Beaver County Times.

Patrick O’Shea, managing editor of the Ellwood City Ledger. Photo: David Smith/100 Days in Appalachia

As a former employee of the nearby paper, O’Shea said he has previously established relationships at the Times and he will often use local and regional stories from their reporters to fill his pages at the Ledger rather than national news. He said this type of resource sharing has been valuable for him.  

According to Ryfe, this is common practice when chains buy local newspapers. “These companies buy up papers in a geographic area so they can ring different kinds of efficiencies out of the chain. That means they share content across the newspapers.”

If There’s Still Hope Despite Ownership Then What’s the Big Deal?

When newspapers are bought by a larger conglomerate, the regional approach they sometimes implement with their coverage can lead to resentment from local residents.

Joyce Blaho, a former marketing and advertising employee of the Herald-Standard in Uniontown, believes the paper has quashed its local content with their extended Mon Valley coverage.

“The paper isn’t the same since being bought out by the Nuttings,” she said, referring to the owners of Ogden Newspaper Inc. Blaho isn’t alone in her newfound discontent.

Photo: David Smith/100 Days in Appalachia

Sara Meyer, who works at the Free Carnegie Library in Connellsville, Pennsylvania, doesn’t read the local Daily Courier because she believe it is “too depressing.” For her, the coverage is unappealing, too many stories about car crashes and arrests.

“Every patron that comes in tells me a story,” Meyer said, who prefers to see more human interest stories in her daily newspaper. “Something like that would help balance all the depressing news.”

Meyer, who has a brother-in-law that works at the Herald-Standard, is empathic, though. She said she understands that local newsrooms don’t have enough manpower to successfully cover the area. Yet, she still can’t bring herself to purchase either paper regularly.

“I can’t justify buying it when I can get everything online,” she said.

Residents’ complaints throughout the Greater Pittsburgh Area echoed Meyer and Blaho’s. ‘The content is poor.’ ‘The paper isn’t representative of the neighborhood.’ ‘A subscription expired and the product wasn’t worth renewal.’ One elderly Aliquippa woman did admit she still reads The Beaver County Times, but “only for the obituaries.”  

If residents are not buying their local newspapers, local publishers can’t afford to stay in business. Even more ironic is a number of people in these communities interviewed for this story admitted while they don’t read their local newspaper, they’d be more upset if the paper closed its doors entirely.

And that is the paradoxical problem local newspapers are facing today: people want them, but they don’t want to pay for them.

“[Readers are] expressing a kind of ambivalence. They value journalism and yet, relatively few of them are willing to pay enough money to sustain this journalism in their community,” Ryfe said.

O’Shea has been the managing editor of the Ellwood City Ledger since the GateHouse Media merger in June 2017.

He said there were 5 staffers in the Ledger’s newsroom at the time. Now, it is operated by O’Shea along with one other full-time reporter, a part-timer and an 80-year-old contributing writer. The paper itself is laid out in Austin, Texas, at New Media’s Center for News and Design– a design hub that serves 90 daily newspapers and 203 weekly papers, according to their website.


O’Shea said he’s not sure if any of the Ledger’s 2,500 readers are aware of the staffing reductions that have taken place under GateHouse’s ownership, but said the lack of empathy between readers and newsrooms “plays a role” in some of the hardships facing the newspaper industry. Residents are “almost always understanding” once the situation is discussed, O’Shea said, but those conversations can be few and far between.

Ideally, O’Shea would like to utilize additional staff to help allocate time to tackle more in-depth stories, but said he isn’t holding out hope for the increased resources.

“If it were up to a local administration, I think there might be more chance of that happening,” he said, “but unfortunately, when you are part of a larger organization, the attention isn’t really there.”

“This is a service the [residents] rely on. This is a business they rely on,” he said. O’Shea believes if the paper were to shut down, “it would leave a serious hole in the community.”

The only problem is someone still has to pay for the news.

This story was supported by The Pittsburgh Pitch, a project of 100 Days in Appalachia and the Center for Media Innovation at Point Park University.

Rural America

Analysis: The Real Cost of Closing Rural Schools



An abandoned Arkansas high school. Mara Casey Tieken, CC BY-SA. Photo: Mara Casey Tieken/Bates College

The school bus begins picking up children before 6 a.m. in Elaine, Arkansas, a small, mostly African American town on the Mississippi River floodplains about 120 miles east of Little Rock. It crawls past long stretches of oxbow lakes, acres of soybean and cotton fields, and two closed schools to arrive – nearly two hours later – in another small Arkansas town called Marvell. At 3:30, the bus begins its winding return trip.

While researching rural education, I have seen how these kinds of school closures are causing as much, if not more, upheaval as what’s going on when public schools in Chicago and other cities close.

And more of this disruption might be imminent: Measures are being debated or implemented in several states, including New Jersey and Vermont, that I believe would lead more rural schools to close.

Rationales and policies

Proponents of closing schools often claim that the step will save tax dollars, boost academic performance and give disadvantaged students more opportunities. These rationales have inspired many national, state and local policies that have led to closure.

Some policies, like federal accountability regulations permit or mandate closure directly. These policies cause officials to close schools with low standardized test scores, as happened with mass closures in Chicago or, more quietly, in efforts in Washington, Virginia and other states to swiftly “turn around” low-performing schools.

These policies rest on two, usually unstated, assumptions. First, the threat of closure will encourage better teaching. Second, if a school closes, its students will get a better education elsewhere.

Other policies are more indirect. For example, Arkansas’ Act 60, a 2004 law, requires small districts to merge if enrollment falls under 350 students. It’s one of many similar measures state lawmakers have passed, partly due to a belief that this will save money, that typically leads to closed schools.

Demands by states that local school systems offer new programs or greater staff compensation without providing the funding required, like those in New York and Texas, are another example. They can force officials to close schools in an effort to trim budgets.

Yet despite the prevalence of these policies, communities typically oppose closures. To better understand this opposition and identify the actual impacts of closure, graduate student Trevor Auldridge-Reveles and I reviewed studies on school closure – both rural and urban. This research, while limited, suggests that the effects can be devastating.

While we find many of the problems with rural schools closing resemble those of urban districts, there are differences, such as the impacts on local communities.

When schools close, local jobs go away. Photo: Mara Casey Tieken/CC BY-SA

Local repercussions

The negative short-term impacts of closure on students’ academic performance are relatively well documented. Test scores and grade point averages in Chicago, Milwaukee and other places have fallen in the year before and immediately after schools close.

The long-term effects are more mixed. For example, a national study found that when students move to an academically stronger school, their test scores typically rise – a boost amounting to 11 extra days of learning in reading and about a month of learning in math. But if they move to a school that’s not academically stronger, their scores tend to decline – reflecting losses of more than a month in reading and a month and a half in math.

And, despite what decision-makers intend, most students do land in similarly performing or even weaker schools.

The research on graduation rates is inconclusive.

Some observe improvements. One study indicates that the share of students in Chicago who graduated from high school climbed from about half to two-thirds following mass closures. But others document declines, such as a nearly 25% drop in graduation rates in a study of a closed high school in a western urban district.

Closing a school can disrupt students’ relationships with peers and teachers and cause confusion and uncertainty. Some studies have shown an increase in absenteeism, though the effects may fade over time.

Students also may become less involved in after-school clubs and sports, even if the number of extracurricular options expands. For those in sparsely populated rural places like Elaine, where the high school closed in 2006 and the elementary school closed in 2009, this is probably due to their long commute. Parents also appear to become less involved, such as by volunteering in a classroom or getting to know their child’s teachers.

Although schools often are closed to save money, there are few studies on whether that happens. The little research conducted so far suggests that savings are minimal at best.

In addition, local teachers, often people of color with ample experience, can lose their jobs.

At a time when fewer than 1 in 5 Americans live in rural areas, the demise of local schools can also lead to the closure of local businesses and expedite population losses.

As I explained in my book on rural schools, in many rural communities, schools are the largest employer. They provide political power, and they tie people together. Once the schools are gone, the community loses all of these benefits: There are smaller crowds at the diner and fewer seats on the school board. Property values may also decline.

What’s more, some research shows that schools in poor communities and communities of color are disproportionately being closed. These studies, such as one conducted in Arkansas, suggest that the unseen costs of our many closure policies are unequal.

As one former Elaine resident recently told me, when the schools closed, it became a “ghost town.”

[ Like what you’ve read? Want more? Sign up for The Conversation’s daily newsletter. ]

Mara Casey Tieken, Associate Professor of Education, Bates College

This article is republished from The Conversation under a Creative Commons license. Read the original article.

Continue Reading

Rural America

Rural Policy: ‘Here’s What We Need,’ Advocates Say



(Top photo: Shawn Poynter) Marlene Chavez, director of community engagement and outreach at Texas Rio Grande Legal Aid, speaks on a panel with Maureen Holland at the 2018 Rural Assembly in Durham, North Carolina. (Bottom, left to right) Carlton Turner, director of the Mississippi Center for Cultural Production; David Lipsetz executive director of the Housing Assistance Council; and Anna Claussen who leads rural climate dialogues that engage communities on initiatives to address climate change

The Trump administration and Democratic presidential candidates have had a chance to sound off on what they think needs to happen in rural America. Now we hear from advocates on the ground who identify the key policy changes they think would do the most good for rural America.

Rural America is ready to contribute more to the nation’s health and economic vitality, say advocates working in community development, education, healthcare, philanthropy and other fields.

To unleash that potential, rural America needs strategic support for the people, institutions and infrastructure that underly all successful communities, they say.

The Daily Yonder, working with the Rural Assembly, identified a dozen rural-policy advocates with firsthand knowledge about the impact of federal policy in rural communities. We asked these in-the-trenches experts to name the top policies they would like to see 2020 presidential candidates address and eventually enact. (The Rural Assembly is a national network of rural leaders. It is managed by the Center for Rural Strategies, which also publishes the Daily Yonder.)

New or increased funding for rural programs is on the agenda. But other themes include a call for inclusion, cultural parity, redirecting programs for more community impact and holding large institutions accountable for the way they serve rural America.

If you’d like to see how candidates’ policy proposals square with what these advocates think would help the most, see the Daily Yonder’s guide to candidates’ policy proposals.

Arts and Culture

Carlton Turner

Carlton Turner is the Director and Lead Artist of the Mississippi Center for Cultural Production, which promotes local economic development through media and arts initiatives. Based in Utica, Mississippi, Turner oversees initiatives to mentor lower-income community members in agribusiness and media.

The rural arts landscape is beautiful and unique all on its own because it is made up of stories that reflect a culture of amazing people with rich and complicated histories. We will never have the infrastructure of urban art centers, neither should we seek to emulate them. But we do need our stories to be validated. We need our artists to know that their stories matter. We need spaces for our children to lean into the stories that connect them to their identity, to learn how to share their dreams and imaginations with pride, to use the tools that speak to them, whether they be on analog or digital platforms. Our communities also need exposure to the disciplines that have the potential to speak to them: dance, music, theater, film, etc. We also need meaningful exchange with artists who share perspectives and life experiences connected to, but different from, our own.

Our needs are simple. We need significant dedicated funding to support arts programming in the schools and beyond. We need a digital infrastructure (rural broadband) robust enough to grow connections with regional and global communities. And we need our arts spaces funded in ways that allow them to serve the communities’ basic needs to see their stories reflected in the myriad of ways that art shows up in our lives. We need rural arts support to be considered as an integral part of community health and wellness, not an afterthought.


David Lipsetz

David Lipsetz is the Executive Director of the Housing Assistance Council, which provides funding and expertise to local organizations developing affordable housing in rural communities.

From World War II to the present day, federal housing policy was designed to create suburbs and revitalize urban centers. Billions were spent on housing tax credits and deductions; millions of home purchases were publicly insured; trillions flowed through the secondary mortgage market’s government-sponsored enterprises. As a result, 52 percent of Americans now live in suburbs, and most of our wealth sits in a handful of metropolitan regions. It’s time to level the playing field and redesign federal housing policy to better include rural America in our plans for prosperity.

The 2020 presidential election is likely to put lots of attention on rural communities. It’s also likely to include a debate over housing policy. It’s about time! Rural housing is what we do at the Housing Assistance Council. It’s been our sole focus since 1971 and has allowed us to advise nine presidential administrations — a few of whom have even listened. This time around we’re reminding candidates: strong local institutions don’t happen by accident, and housing markets wither and die without access to capital. We suggest:

  1. Invest heavily in the capacity of hometown non-profits to give rural communities a local champion and a fighting chance in the complex world of housing finance.
  2. Channel capital to community development finance institutions to deploy in places banks can’t reach. It will prime those places for future private investment and allow the big primary and secondary mortgage market players to meet their duty to serve and reinvest in rural communities.


Niel Ritchie

Niel Ritchie is the CEO of Main Street Project, which develops programs to combat rural poverty through regenerative poultry-based agriculture systems. Based in Northfield, Minnesota, Mr. Ritchie oversees initiatives to develop regional small-scale agricultural economies.

Our globalized, industrial food system is having devastating effects on people and the planet. From dead zones in the Gulf of Mexico to new strains of antibiotic-resistant diseases and the destruction of rain forests, the cost of our “cheap food” is going up.

U.S. farm policy is largely to blame, based on a persistent myth that our farmers must produce as much as possible in order to “feed the world.”  This policy relic of the Cold War fueled the expansion of chemical-intensive, monoculture production on marginal lands, lowered crop and livestock prices, and drained the wealth from rural communities. It’s time to turn the page.

In its purest form, agriculture is an economic engine capable of generating rural wealth. It holds tremendous potential to restore soil health, protect our waters and mitigate climate change.  Unlocking that potential requires new tools for farmers and a shift in policy to support more sustainable and regenerative farming practices.

For decades, bipartisan farm bills have included both farm safety-net programs (e.g. crop insurance) and food and nutrition programs (e.g. Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program, SNAP).  The strategy of combining rural and urban interests in the bills has served as a bulwark against the politics of division.

Going forward, we must make the health of people and the planet our guiding farm-bill principles. We must expand and strengthen rural-urban alliances to bring about the needed changes in policy.  And we must put an end to the myth that we’re “feeding the world.”


Bill Bynum

Bill Bynum is the CEO of HOPE Credit Union and HOPE Enterprise Corporation. Based in Jackson, Mississippi, HOPE provides financial services, policy analysis and philanthropic support for economically distressed communities in Alabama, Arkansas, Louisiana, Mississippi and Tennessee.

Nationwide, there are 395 counties or parishes where the poverty rate has eclipsed 20 percent for three decades in a row. The vast majority of these are rural places. Those of us who live and work in persistent poverty areas know these challenges extend far beyond a chronic lack of income to the externalities of underinvestment. Low health and education outcomes fostered by dilapidating and aging community facilities, a lack of quality affordable housing and the proliferation of financial deserts all strike a common chord in regions such as Appalachia, the Mississippi Delta, the Black Belt, U.S. Mexico border, California’s Central Valley and in Indian Country.

As the 2020 election draws near, candidates should demonstrate a real commitment to expand investment in persistent poverty places by:

Supporting the 10-20-30 plan:  The 10-20-30 plan requires federal agencies to designate 10 percent of all discretionary funds to be allocated to places where the poverty rate has exceeded 20 percent for the last 30 years. The plan should be comprehensive and include the U.S. Departments of Agriculture, Commerce, Health and Human Services, Housing and Urban Development, Labor, Transportation and Treasury.

Modernizing the Community Reinvestment Act (CRA) to increase lending and investment in rural areas: Too many rural communities exist beyond the reach of the Community Reinvestment Act. This phenomenon occurs because CRA links its requirements for lending, service and investment to places where bank branches exist. As a result, while large banks extract substantial profits from rural communities, they are not required to reinvest there because their physical presence is limited. CRA should require investment in these economically distressed places, including investing in CDFIs that serve these communities.


Brian Fogle

Brian Fogle is the President of the Community Foundation of the Ozarks, a network of foundations and donors serving communities in central and southern Missouri. Based in Springfield, Missouri, Fogle consults with civic organizations and 49 affiliate foundations with $283 million in assets.

We’ve been talking about this for a long time. I remember over 20 years ago, when I was involved in the Stand Up For Rural America campaign, we had an ongoing dialogue with the Council on Foundations about rural funding. A few years later, there was a gathering in Montana to answer a challenge from Senator Max Baucus (who served represented Montana I the U.S. Senate from 1978 to 2014) to bring more philanthropy to rural America. The resulting product was a book and a continued decline in funding. If I’ve heard it once, I’ve heard it 50 times from funders “we can’t scale our programs in rural areas efficiently and effectively.” And that’s true—if we try to replicate large programs for small communities. It doesn’t work. As a result, funding continues to dwindle.

What many funders don’t realize is the impact that seemingly small dollars can have in rural places. As a community foundation serving many rural communities, we’ve seen recipients cry from a podium receiving a $5,000 check, knowing what that means for their hometown. For the price of a consultant in an urban area, you can have a tremendous, lasting impact in a small community. Rural citizens know how to make a little go a long way through volunteerism, grit and frugality.

Most of America is served by one of the 860 community foundations that exist in our country. They are all place-based and are governed by the people who know the area best—their residents. I think one of the best possibilities to serve rural America is for governments and national funders to work with their respective community foundation to address challenges and build community. They know how to scale giving to make it work, and they know the strengths and challenges of their community the best because they live, work and play there.

There is much hope and promise for rural America, still, but we need to halt the dialogue after several decades and start investing.


Anna Claussen

Anna Claussen leads rural climate dialogues that engage communities on initiatives to address climate change. Based in Minneapolis, Minnesota, Claussen founded Voices for Rural Resilience.

We must ensure our climate and environmental solutions are also rural community solutions.

Most of our natural resources essential for survival and critical in addressing our climate crisis are stewarded by rural people living and working across 84 percent of our nation’s geography. Rural people have lower life expectancy and higher poverty rates, are on average more food and energy insecure, and earn less than their urban counterparts.

The future of our planet – of our climate and our environment – is explicitly linked to the health and well-being of our rural people and places. It depends on policies and programs that prioritize rural equity, seeking to achieve a balance between economic and social vitality and commitments to long-term climate resilience. These policies must reduce—not increase—our historic discrimination and ongoing inequities (economic, racial, cultural, geographic, etc.) of vulnerability.

Examples of solutions that will achieve these aims:

  • Invest in efficient buildings and increase access to affordable and renewable energy sources, while prioritizing local ownership, for our rural communities to benefit from decreased energy poverty.
  • Support a diverse suite of locally determined conservation efforts across both public and private lands, including working landscapes, that support both vibrant rural communities and healthy landscapes.
  • Provide incentives for clean-energy infrastructure and community-based energy projects while simultaneously supporting our nation’s farms, towns and rural tribal communities in the transformation of their function and identity.

Ultimately, the most robust approach to addressing climate change and protecting our environment will come from a foundation of reciprocal exchange, intentional representation and authentic compassion. It will require slowing down to get there faster.


Michelle Decker

Michelle Decker is the CEO of The Community Foundation, serving Riverside and San Bernadino, California. Ms. Decker has 27 years of experience in community economic development and previously served as the CEO of Rural Action, in the Appalachian region of Ohio, where she led efforts in social enterprise development.

The first thing each presidential candidate should do is declare that they have no clue about how to create more jobs in rural America. At that point, they should stop and wait for the influx of ideas from rural America. The main idea folks will share will be around infrastructure investment because unless that’s fair and equitable, rural America will have a hard time even floating a good idea.

Once that budgetary item is resolved, which I’m sure it will be (a huge investment in USDA Rural Development will work nicely), then we can discuss how rural America is rich with the sustainable, biological resources that our country requires for an energy, food and fiber independent future. We will talk about investing in the management of those resources, as well as the technological breakthroughs that will be required to use them sustainably.

The management will require some public funds (for U.S. Forest Service, BLM, etc.) but we think we can use private and public investment for the tech transfer ideas. But we’ll only use those dollars if the venture capitalists promise the jobs stay with rural America, and don’t have to move to San Francisco or other such places.

We will also promote a very large investment in the entrepreneurial culture of our rural communities through various vehicles, to foster our natural talent for figuring stuff out on our own and supporting local businesses to grow. This will involve our universities and community colleges and their incubators and accelerators, but there will be a clear-as-a-bell understanding that we have to build a resilient ecosystem to support job creators of all sizes, and that there is no silver bullet here.

There will also be a clear understanding that rural America is a prize, not a drain. Any investment pays back well. Our presidential candidates will listen deeply and make a clear commitment that every square inch of these United States of America is invaluable to the nation’s future and that of Planet Earth.


Francisco Guajardo

Francisco Guajardo is Professor of Organization and School Leadership at the University of Texas, Rio Grande Valley. He is a national leader in place-based educational initiatives.

National strategy: Rural schools can learn from each, advocate for each other and share collective resources. Professional development for rural schools and communities often calls for theories and practices different from predominant educational thinking born out of urban educational settings. A national rural education strategy can address issues of professional development for teachers, school leaders and community advocates.

From deficits to assets: Rural schools and communities have wide-ranging strengths and assets, but popular perceptions continue to view rural schools and communities as poor, marginal and part of a hinterland reality. While conditions of systemic poverty may grip many rural schools and communities across the country, those same schools and communities also have strengths, virtues and proud histories. To move from deficits to strengths can impact the psychology of a school and a community; it can produce a shift from hopelessness to hope and opportunity. To build rural school and community strength often requires a change in consciousness, before rural folk feel good about working for positive change.

Tackle rural poverty: Rural schools and communities continue to be mired by conditions of poverty and low levels of educational investment, a historical pattern that has grown unabated. Poor health care, inferior access to technology and local economies without strong employment opportunities perpetuate conditions of rural poverty.  Local, state and federal policies can impact conditions of poverty, but policymakers must understand rural poverty before they create policy opportunities for rural schools and communities.

Technology, tolerance, talent: Rural schools have a history of incubating innovation, invention and creativity. Places that do that generally offer access to technology. They are places that are culturally and socially tolerant, and they figure out ways to hold onto their talented people–and in some cases recruit talent. In the Rise of the Creative Class, Richard Florida argues that the most creative communities, including rural places, emerge as creative communities because they focus on technologies, on being tolerant and on nurturing local talent. I grew up in a rural school that met that criteria.


Alan Morgan

Alan Morgan is the President of the National Rural Health Association, a network of individuals and organizations engaging in research and advocacy for rural health policies.

As mortality gaps between rural and urban Americans escalate, three in five rural voters say they would be more likely to vote for a candidate in the 2020 election who prioritized access to health care in rural America.

Access to care for many rural patients has worsened.  One hundred eight rural hospitals have closed since 2010, more than 46 percent of rural hospitals are currently operating at a loss, meaning hundreds more will close if federal policies don’t soon change. When rural hospitals close, they rarely reopen — rural patients are left without emergency room access, and 20 percent of a community’s economy vanishes. Health disparities and economic decline ensue.  Most closures are occurring in areas where hospitals are needed most — in communities of high health disparities, high poverty and high minority populations.

Drastic and draconian Medicare cuts and the lack of Medicaid expansion are closing rural hospitals. The Save Rural Hospital Act will both stabilize current reimbursements and create the Community Outpatient Hospital, a new model that offers the flexibility needed for rural communities. Rural hospitals must be empowered to deploy innovative approaches to deliver care that protects emergency access.

Healthcare workforce shortages plague rural America. (About 20 percent of the population is rural, yet only 9 percent of physicians work there.) Hundreds of rural maternity wards have closed, leaving 54 percent of rural counties without hospital-based obstetrics and creating high risks for mother and child. Overcoming chronic shortages is vital; support of workforce development programs and telemedicine is critical.


Marlene Chavez

Marlene Chavez is the Director of Community Engagement and Outreach at Texas Rio Grande Legal Aid, which provides free legal services to 23,000 low-income farmworkers, veterans and disaster survivors. Edyael Casaperalta is a Fellow at the American Indian Law Program of the University of Colorado Law School, where she researches and writes about federal Indian law, indigenous peoples’ rights, international human rights and telecommunications and technology.

The strategies of terror embraced by the current administration hurt rural communities. Terror tactics such as separating children from their parents, locking up children in make-shift camps, conducting highly-publicized Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) raids, adding a citizenship question to the Census, withholding the rights of Americans of Muslim faith and deploying a task-force to reopen cases of citizenship, among others, hurt rural Americans, our neighbors, our families and threaten our communities. We want the next president to renounce and halt these tactics designed to reverberate fear throughout our communities. We want the next president to address the following areas of migration policy:

  • Fund rural America’s progress, not waste public funds on a border wall.
Edyael Casaperalta

Since 2007, the U.S. government has spent billions of dollars in the construction of barriers across the border with Mexico. In May of 2018, the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers released a study indicating where new segments of the border fence are to be constructed in the Rio Grande Valley, overriding environmental concerns, impact on water level, increased risk of flooding, and possible violations of a treaty with Mexico. The billions of dollars in taxpayer money spent to pursue and build this wall are better spent in addressing socio-economic problems in rural America. These funds should go to helping the 17 million of rural Americans who live in areas without a rural health clinic, end the hunger that plagues 2.4 million of rural households, reopening the 102 hospitals that were closed in rural communities, and close the digital divide for the 23.4 million of rural Americans still lacking internet access.

  • Protect the right to asylum

The Trump Administration has implemented the Migrant Protection Protocol in some areas of California and Texas and on July 16, 2019, announced plans to expand it. This program requires certain asylum seekers to begin their asylum cases in Mexico or Guatemala, yet both countries have not agreed to acting as a “3rd country.” This protocol poses an extreme burden on their right to apply for asylum. Many migrants have no living arrangements in Mexico or Guatemala and are forced to rely on shelters or other unstable living arrangements while they are there. Border cities are often dangerous, and asylum seekers may be subject to additional persecution and danger while they await a decision in their cases. This protocol also gives border patrol agents unfettered discretion to decide that someone is not an asylum seeker and should return to Mexico, even involuntarily, without any review by an immigration judge. This is a potential violation of the Convention Against Torture and the Foreign Affairs Reform and Restructuring Act which says that it is U.S. policy “not to expel, extradite, or otherwise effect the involuntary return of any person to a country in which there are substantial grounds for believing the person would be in danger of being subjected to torture.” 8 USC 1231.

  • Uphold our tradition of citizenship

It is an American tradition, affirmed by the 14th Amendment to the Constitution and the Supreme Court, that those born in the United States are automatically U.S. citizens. Since the late 1800s, our nation chose to bestow citizenship automatically upon those who are born within our territory. In January, a bill that would limit the American tradition of citizenship to apply only to those born to a parent that is a citizen, legal permanent resident or served in the U.S. military. This effort is yet another attempt to control the migrants that join our communities. But rural America has always been a land of migrants. Since the inception of our nation, rural communities were the destination for millions of New Americans. It is in rural towns, farms and local governments that newcomers forged their identity as Americans and did the work to build each state of our nation. This bill will not stop migration from taking place, migrants from giving birth to new Americans, nor migrants from becoming the linking threads in the fabric of rural America. This bill will only serve to limit the pool of talent that joins and takes root in rural communities. This bill goes against the rural tradition.

Technology and Broadband

Roberto Gallardo

Roberto Gallardo is Assistant Director of the Purdue Center for Regional Development at Purdue University. He has written numerous articles for the Daily Yonder and is a Senior Fellow at the Center for Rural Strategies, which publishes the Daily Yonder.

Talent exists everywhere; the ecosystem under which it thrives does not. As the digital age continues to unfold, rural communities are at risk of being left behind. The following areas need to be addressed to ensure rural communities can participate fully in the digital age:

  • Ensure mechanisms where adequate and affordable broadband is a reality in rural areas. This may include better aligning existing resources and incentives to smaller providers that are vested in these rural communities and/or explore open access models in areas where dedicated infrastructure is too expensive to build.
  • Provide resources and technical assistance to rural communities to improve their ability and capacity to pursue funding mechanisms to upgrade their broadband infrastructure.
  • Design, fund and implement a national strategy delegated to states that addresses digital inclusion, including devices, adequate and affordable connectivity and digital skills/literacy.
  • Increase awareness efforts throughout rural communities on the implications of the digital age and how they can plan for, transition to and prosper in the digital age.
  • Assist rural communities in shifting their economic development strategies from industry attraction to placemaking and economic gardening, strategies that focus inward rather than outward.

This article was edited and compiled with the assistance of Charlie Zong. It was originally published by the Daily Yonder

Continue Reading

Rural America

New Research Challenges Idea Behind ‘Deaths of Despair’



Photo: Pexels

Low-income Americans are dying at a higher rate than high-income Americans. In fact, the life span of low-income Americans is becoming shorter – a trend largely attributed to drug and alcohol-related deaths, which has been called deaths of despair.

“The least well-off Americans have seen their wages become stagnant, their jobs become obsolete, their neighborhoods crumbling in various ways. And so there’s a thought that that leads to despair for less-educated Americans and they turn to drugs or suicide,” explained University of Michigan professor Arline Geronimus.

Geronimus was the lead on a new study that argues higher rates of death among low-income Americans are due to inequity, not despair. She talked about her research in a conversation with West Virginia Public Broadcasting’s health reporter Kara Lofton.

Lofton: But your research actually challenges that theory [of despair], correct?

Geronimus: That’s correct. My theory doesn’t necessarily challenge that the increase is due in some way to the fact that life has gotten much harder. I mean, resources have gotten fewer, for the working class and for the least-educated Americans. But it challenges whether their response to it is despair, as opposed to working that much harder to make ends meet, to support their families, to overcome the obstacles in their way. 

There’s a rich literature suggesting that when you work so tenaciously against barriers or difficulties or trying to make ends meet or working multiple jobs, that [in] itself can lead to chronic physiological stress reactions in your body that over time cause wear and tear in your body and can lead to sort of accelerated aging, the early onset of a variety of chronic diseases, cardiovascular diseases, cancers. And so you might also see this increasing inequity in life expectancy if what was happening was people are working so hard and under uncertainty and hard conditions that it wears away at their bodies.

Lofton: So you’re basically pointing to research that shows that chronic stress can impact the body’s health responses. So how healthy somebody is, is impacted by their stress in their lives.

Geronimus: Right and also how chronic it is, or unremitting, the different kinds of stress people think of stress is sort of just a feeling. But it’s more than a feeling. It’s a biological reaction and it can be triggered by feelings. But it can also be triggered by environmental factors, toxins in your environment, by sleeplessness, by working night shift jobs, from anxiety about how you’re going to make ends meet, how you’re going to get food on the table, how you’re going to pay the expensive hospital bill. You know, people have this vague notion of stress, but the stressors I’m talking about, include that idea of stress, but so much more.

Lofton: So I mean, but let’s tease this out a little bit. If you are chronically stressed about how you’re going to get to work, and how you are going to put food on the table for your family. I mean, doesn’t that contribute to a sense of despair?

Geronimus: It can, but the distinction that I’m making is despair, first of all, is entirely a feeling. And especially if you talk about deaths of despair, and look to suicide and opiate overdose, and put those together, it kind of paints this picture of people who just give up and tune out – just unproductive and depressed – and either literally kill themselves or kill themselves over time – or take risks that could have killed themselves very quickly.

That’s a very different thing than what I’m talking about, which is engaging with tenacity and even kind of hopefulness, the difficult obstacles –  going to the two jobs, waiting for the bus, you know, not just going off and getting a drink. But that’s kind of what, in jargon is called “high-effort coping.” [It] itself can harm your body if it’s chronic. When the going gets as tough as it’s gotten for the least educated Americans over the last 25-30 years, if they choose to try to engage and support their families and themselves anyway, it’s sort of like batting their head against the wall.

Lofton: So you actually do talk about this quite a bit this idea of educational inequity and the role that educational inequity plays in sort of health disparities. Can you talk to me a little bit about that?

Geronimus: In our study, we looked at the least-educated Americans at any given time. So it’s not just [having] less than say, than [a] high school [education]. Because if [it] were, if you didn’t graduate high school 50 years ago, that might not be a big deal. But if you don’t graduate high school now, it certainly is, in terms of your opportunities. And over this period of time, because we’ve moved so much to a high-tech economy and an automated economy and a globalized economy, people with the least education are having the hardest time now finding jobs in our current economy. And even those who have them, and have had them even consistently, their real wages have stayed stagnant for 30 years, while prices of housing, food, health care, everything’s skyrocketed. So if your wages have stayed the same, your life is harder, even if you are employed.

Lofton: So what is the takeaway? What do you hope the study will contribute to the general conversation around the data that shows that Americans are not living as long as they used to?

Geronimus: That it shows that the main drivers of [death among low-income Americans] are cancers and cardiovascular diseases and internal causes. And that points in different directions than if you think people are despairing and taking drugs. And you would come up with different policies to address it. And as a researcher, we would pursue different avenues in researching it. And if in fact, it’s related to keeping on keeping on, even in the face of early onset of diseases and low wages and great uncertainty and illness in your family. That certainly points in directions that are different than ‘let’s just make sure we get opioids off the streets.’

This article was originally published by West Virginia Public Broadcasting.

Appalachia Health News is a project of West Virginia Public Broadcasting, with support from Marshall Health and Charleston Area Medical Center.

Continue Reading