Bill to steer half of discretionary state ad spending to Maryland news outlets draws broad support
Loading...
Summary
SB 459 would require state agencies to direct 50% of discretionary advertising dollars to qualifying Maryland local news organizations and public media. Publishers, broadcasters and national advocates testified that the budget‑neutral measure would keep state advertising dollars in‑state to support local reporting capacity and civic information.
Senate Bill 459 would require that half of state agencies’ discretionary advertising expenditures be placed with qualifying Maryland local news organizations, including public media, where the spend is discretionary and the purchase meets the state’s communications needs.
Sen. Rosa Papp framed the bill as a budget‑neutral, “buy‑local” approach to strengthen community news ecosystems without increasing spending: the policy would prioritize Maryland outlets for state discretionary advertising campaigns (public-service announcements, informational campaigns, etc.), not statutorily required public notices or out‑of‑state tourism and recruitment buys. Supporters cited New York City’s model, which has directed tens of millions of dollars to community and ethnic news outlets and helped hire local reporting staff.
A wide mix of local publishers, broadcasters, and national advocates testified in favor: publishers argued that local outlets now offer competitive digital and audience-targeting services comparable to out‑of‑state firms, and that keeping state ad dollars in Maryland supports jobs and local coverage; the Maryland/DC/Delaware Broadcasters Association and public media representatives urged inclusion of noncommercial broadcast inventory and local platforms. Rebuild Local News, a national nonprofit, presented research showing Maryland ranks low in journalists per capita and argued the set‑aside is an effective, budget‑neutral intervention to expand coverage.
Committee members asked how qualifying outlets would be selected and guarded against bad‑faith actors. Witnesses said objective criteria in the bill and third‑party list management (for example, through a nonprofit press foundation) would be used; proponents emphasized focusing on acts of journalism and demonstrated local audience reach rather than subjective editorial judgments. The hearing included strong, cross‑sector support from publishers, broadcasters and public‑media organizations; no committee vote was recorded in the transcript.
