Tim Rutten
of the LA Times has belatedly discovered the existence of a "vigorous local
Spanish-language media". Mejor tarde que nunca, I say.
Mr. Rutten
wrongly speaks of the "emergence" of said media outlets. There is
nothing remotely emergent about the longstanding ratings strength of
Univision-owned television station KMEX and radio station KSCA. Never mind the 80 year long presence of La
Opinión. The "vigorous local Spanish-language media" of Los Angeles
is and has been obvious to anyone who cared to look or listen. (Heck, there has
been a "vigorous local Spanish-language media" even in an emergent
Hispanic community like Charlotte, NC for at least three years.)
The lack of
consistent coverage of Spanish-language media, local or network, is my main
beef with the paper. Don't get me wrong, I think the Los Angeles Times is an
outstanding newspaper and very much enjoy reading it. Furthermore, I admit bias;
I report on Spanish-language media for a living. But even when I try and
discount my professional bias I find it hard to believe how the LAT manages to report
so little about the goings-on at Spanish-language media. Los Angeles is the largest
Spanish-language media market in the country. (And it is also the largest media
market for Latinos who prefer English to Spanish, which explains why LATV, mun2
and SíTV are all headquartered in LA and why MTV Tr3s is available over the
air.)
Granted, the
LAT's Meg James provided excellent coverage of the Univision sale and its aftermath. She was also quick
to report on the Pappas dispute with Azteca America. But, those are business
stories. Valid and important business stories that I enjoyed reading and
reporting on but alone they do not provide a full picture of the Spanish-language
media business.
Too little
is written in English about Spanish-language media. And not just at the LAT. The same is true to a lesser extent of the otherwise
wonderful LAObserved and of Romenesko, which has yet to feature any mention of
the large-scale layoffs at Spanish-language newspapers such as Rumbo.
The absence
of coverage is difficult to understand given the large numbers of people consuming
Spanish-language media. Plenty is
written about the cable news networks (Full Disclosure: I am a former CNN bureau
chief) even though they generate very small audiences.
The other
part of the problem is that when Spanish-language media is covered the
resulting articles are often replete with errors (the same is true of press
releases). I was encouraged to see Mr. Rutten addressing both English and
Spanish-language media in his column but dismayed by his characterization of
"Spanish-speaking media" and "their too-pervasive frivolity".
Now, one
can accurately and fairly describe whole swathes of Spanish-language radio and
television entertainment programming as "frivolous". However, the
traditional network newscasts (I am not talking about "Primer Impacto" or "Al rojo
vivo") on Telemundo and Univision are the very antithesis of "frivolous".
Both network evening newscasts consistently and solidly cover news of importance
to Latinos in the United States.
"Frivolous",
however, would be an apt description for, say, this Spanish-language television
commercial promoting Hoy the LAT-owned Spanish-language newspaper. The spot
features a young woman gushing about Alejandro Sanz after the fashion of a pubescent RBD fanatic.
En fin, I
respectfully suggest Mr. Rutten channel his newfound awareness of "Spanish-speaking
media" into more intensive coverage of Univision, Telemundo, TeleFutura,
Azteca America and Liberman Broadcasting as well as LA-based Spanish-language
cable networks such as Fox Sports en Español. Read La Opinion and listen to
what the Bogeyman and Tweety Bird have to say. And then write about
Spanish-language media with the same cojones you bring to your coverage of the
LAT and other English-language media.
Comments