In summary
The six major newspaper editorial boards unanimously agreed on two ballot measures, but disagreed on the rest. While most followed ideological lines, there were a few exceptions.
Endorsements have made national headlines lately, with both the Los Angeles Times and Washington Post announcing in the final weeks of the campaign that they won’t be backing a presidential candidate.
But presidential endorsements are only part of an editorial board’s role during election season. They’re also busy crafting recommendations for state and local candidates, plus ballot propositions.
California’s six leading newspaper editorial boards agreed unanimously on two of the 10 propositions. They all said that Proposition 33, which would let local governments impose rent control, is a bad idea. They all supported Prop. 3, a constitutional amendment to enshrine same-sex marriage.
On most others, editorial boards are split along ideological lines: The L.A. Times, San Francisco Chronicle and Sacramento Bee supported both $10 billion borrowing measures, Prop. 2 for schools and Prop. 4 for climate and water, as well as Prop. 6, which would limit forced labor in California prisons.
The three boards also opposed Prop. 36, a measure to raise penalties for some drug and theft crimes. “It would suck up much of the funding Californians recently approved for mental health care, and gut programs that have successfully slashed recidivism and brought much-needed trauma recovery services to crime victims,” the L.A.Times editorial board wrote.
The Mercury News, San Diego Union-Tribune and Southern California News Group (which includes the Orange County Register and Los Angeles Daily News) are all against the two bond measures, plus Prop. 6.
“If we expect the same of ourselves and our children, if we can insist members of the military conduct those chores, certainly we can ask incarcerated convicted criminals to do the same,” The Mercury News wrote on Prop. 6.
On two measures, one board disagreed with all the others: The Southern California News Group came out in favor of Prop. 34, which targets a sponsor of rent control measures, while the Bee supported Prop. 35, which would make sure that a health care plan tax goes toward low-income patients.
In California, some experts say they’re not confident that the proposition endorsements will make much of a difference, even for the ones that are nearly neck and neck in polling. The polls show that few likely voters are still undecided.
Thad Kousser, a political science professor at University of California, San Diego, says while endorsements greatly influenced voters in the “heyday” of print newspapers decades ago, there’s not much research about the current media landscape.
“People have stopped reading newspapers, or at least subscribing to newspapers as much,” Kousser said. “American trust in institutions across the board — whether that’s government, the military, public universities, mainstream news organizations — has declined over the last eight years, and that could lead fewer people to trust and rely on newspaper endorsements.”
The L.A. Times’ decision prompted three members of its editorial board to resign, including its editor, Mariel Garza. In her resignation letter, she raised concerns about the potential impact on down-ballot endorsements.
“The non-endorsement undermines the integrity of the editorial board and every single endorsement we make, down to school board races,” Garza said in the letter. “People will justifiably wonder if each endorsement was a decision made by a group of journalists after extensive research and discussion, or through decree by the owner.”
Kousser, however, said people seem to view the Times’ decision not to endorse a presidential candidate as separate from the rest of its endorsements. “Since the editorial staff was clearly leading the charge on the local and state endorsements, I don’t think it changes how people view them,” he said.
Still, Jacki Schechner, spokesperson for the AIDS Healthcare Foundation, a major backer of Prop. 33, said that proposition endorsements have also been influenced by business interests.
“The largest advertisers for most large papers are real estate,” Schechner said in a statement to CalMatters. “Most websites representing grassroots constituencies and the Democratic Party support Prop 33.”
Jack Pitney, a political science professor at Claremont McKenna College, said endorsements have the largest impact in contests that aren’t getting as much attention.
“For all the hubbub about the L.A. Times and Washington Post, practically nobody is going to change their votes account of what editorial says,” he said. “If, however, it’s a ballot proposition that voters don’t know much about and have a hard time understanding, a newspaper endorsement might provide a tipping point.”
Prop. 6 has the least amount of support in the most recent poll, with 41% of voters in favor. The campaign is hopeful that voters may turn to the “yes” endorsements to make their decisions.
“Major editorial boards across California reached the conclusion that prioritizing rehabilitation over prison slave labor reduces recidivism and enhances community safety for all,” said
Nini Wu, a spokesperson for Yes on Prop. 6. “Such key insights and analysis make these publications trusted voices for Californians and it’s why many voters look to them for guidance.”
According to Pitney, endorsements are more likely to influence voters to vote against a proposition. “All things being equal, it is easier to run a ‘no’ campaign than a ‘yes’ campaign, and if all people know about a ballot measure is something bad, they’re going to vote against it,” he said.
This could impact the measures that have mostly received “no” endorsements: Props. 33, 34 and 35.
Although it’s unclear how much of a difference newspaper endorsements will make in the final election results, Kousser said it’s important that editorial boards keep writing them.
“The people involved in these endorsements have tremendous expertise, especially expertise that’s rare on state and local ballot measures,” Kousser said. “They have interactive conversations with campaigns and candidates, and they deliberate as a group, rather than through one leader. That process really brings a lot of value to the public.”