Gary Wilson
Commentary
We worry about Asian carp sucking the life out of the Great Lakes sport fishing industry, and that’s a legitimate concern.
But what other impacts are due to the advance of the voracious feeder?
On the positive side it has put a spotlight on the Chicago Area Waterways in a way that never would have happened were carp not knocking at the door of Lake Michigan. People in positions of responsibility are looking at serious plans to physically separate the Great Lakes from the Mississippi River.
It also drained tens of millions of dollars from other Great Lakes needs. The money for the unplanned temporary measures to stop the carp had to come from somewhere. Unfortunately, it came from an already tight restoration budget. That’s a negative.
But there’s another impact that worries me.The fixation on carp has drowned out other issues that should be on the public’s mind.
Media — print, radio, television, social and blogs – have been all over the Asian carp story with sustained coverage.
Why?
Because it sells. Big, menacing fish that jump out of the water into boats are a great hook, pardon the pun.
And let’s be realistic, most Great Lakes environmental issues can be boring.
Are you clamoring for more coverage of the negotiation of the Great Lakes Water Quality Agreement?
I doubt it and that’s too bad because it’s important. It will guide how the U.S. and Canada manage 20 percent of the Earth’s fresh surface water over the next decade. That’s a weighty topic deserving our attention.
How about coverage of the pros and cons of privatizing municipal water systems? There’s a snooze of a read. Don’t expect the media to jump on that issue, important as it is.
Here’s an anecdote to support my premise.
Shortly after the Asian carp advance hit the spotlight in 2010, I wrote a Great Lakes commentary on another issue that had nothing — zero, nada — to do with carp. But I had innocently included an Asian carp reference that wasn’t relevant and should have been edited out.
What followed is interesting.
The comments section of my post lit up with rants and raves…. all about Asian carp and nothing to do with the topic. Readers saw Asian carp, ignored everything else and raised a ruckus.
So what’s an editor to do?
Go with your journalistic instincts and training and cover those less sexy but more important issues at the risk of low readership, 
which translates to declining advertising revenue? Or follow the money and beat the glitzy story to death?
All media struggle with the issue.
The venerable Washington Post is reinventing itself according to a New York Times business report on its competitor. The Post now uses tracking metrics that allow management to see what readers click on. One use of the tool is to determine how to allocate resources, as in reporters.
The problem is that the practice pits popularity against substance, which I don’t like. But who am I to quarrel with the Post’s editors? They’re trying to find a way to stay in business. If readers want puff, give ’em more puff, though hard news will remain at the core of the Post’s mission.
Chicago Public Radio has access to similar metrics and used them last week to evaulate if and how to cover a story that other media blanketed. The station saw the story as essentially a non-event that merited nothing more than a minor mention. But the public grabbed it because there was a human interest element — young student done wrong by the city – and the metrics said play it up, keep it alive for a few days. And so it was.
Chicago Public Radio management elected to ignore the numbers and relegated the piece to an inside page below the fold in newspaper parlance.
Maybe public radio has that luxury.
I’ve written here about water privatization and the Great Lakes Water Quality Agreement. Neither commentary received much attention based on reader responses.
Two weeks ago my commentary about separating the Chicago Area Waterways System from the Mississippi generated the most responses I’ve ever received on a column. And at its core it wasn’t about Asian carp, though the fish were the catalyst for the story.
The Great Lakes Water Quality Agreement negotiations are in their final stages. When a deal is announced, some media will cover it but you may have to search to find a story.
Experts who track privatization of municipal systems tell me not much is happening in the region. Both Milwaukee and Chicago are out of the water privatization game for the near term. But the underlying motivation to privatize — each city’s need for budget balancing revenue — remains. It may not be game over yet.
I’ll continue to write about those and other Great Lakes issues that fly under the radar because they’re important.
By the way, I included Asian carp in the title of this commentary.
I wanted to make sure people read it.