Newspaper JOAs are now only history

The last of the joint operating agreements between two daily newspapers was quietly dissolved at the end of 2025, closing a half-century era in which newspapers in 28 cities, including Honolulu, were granted exemptions from anti-trust laws to allow merging their business operations while maintaining separate newsrooms.

The last of the JOAs between the Detroit Free Press and the Detroit News, was voluntarily dissolved on December 28, 2025. Both newspapers have continuing publishing after the dissolution of their JOA.

In Hawaii, the Honolulu Star-Bulletin and the Honolulu Advertiser formed a joint operating agreement in May 1962 after a determination that the Advertiser was a “failing newspaper” and was unlikely to survive without the cost savings brought about by a merger with the Star-Bulletin. At that time, the Star-Bulletin, the evening newspaper, was much larger and financially healthy, while the morning Advertiser was struggling.

A separate company, the Hawaii Newspaper Agency, was formed to operate the joint printing, distribution, and business side of the merged newspapers.

But in 1969, the U.S. Supreme Court found a similar JOA in Arizona violated federal anti-trust laws, a blow to newspapers across the country.

In response, Hawaii’s senior senator, Daniel K. Inouye, introduced S 1520, the Newspaper Preservation Act, which was quickly passed into law. At the time, there were 22 JOAs involving 44 daily newspapers.

One of the joint agreements covered by Inouye’s bill was between the Honolulu Star-Bulletin and the Honolulu Advertiser dated back to May 1962. Both newspapers were locally owned at that time. The Star-Builletin was the evening newspaper, and public reading habits at the time meant it had a considerably larger circulation than its morning rival, the Advertiser.

About a year after passage of the Newspaper Preservation Act, the Star-Bulletin was purchased by Gannett, a large national newspaper chain.

During the heyday of the Hawaii JOA, the two newspapers were reportedly sharing about $50 million per year in profit.

I was recruited to join the Star-Bulletin staff as an investigative reporter in 1992, after publishing my own newsletter about Hawaii politics for two years.

But at the same time, public habits were changing and readers moving toward morning newspapers, prompting Gannett to buy the Advertiser, which had become the larger newspaper, in 1992, soon after I received the offer to join the SB. At the same time, Gannett sold the Star-Bulletin to Liberty Newspapers, a Tennessee-based chain owned by publisher Rupert Phillips.

In early 1993, when it became clear that the Star-Bulletin would survive the transition, I belatedly accepted the offer and started as a Star-Bulletin reporter about March 1993.

The Honolulu JOA ended with the sale of the Star-Bulletin to Black Press, owned by Canadian publisher David Black. The first issue of the “new” Star-Bulletin was published on March 15, 2001.

According to Wikipedia:

The Newspaper Preservation Act was touted as a relief measure to allow multiple newspapers competing in the same market to cut costs, thus ensuring that no one paper could have supremacy in the market by driving the other(s) out of business. However, mounting evidence suggests the passage of the Act was less about protecting editorial diversity within community newspaper markets than about inflating the profit margins of national newspaper chains.[3] Large newspaper chains were able to sustain high profits while driving independent newspapers out of business, or forcing them to sell their stake to a chain.[3] In fact, President Richard M. Nixon initially opposed the passage of the act (as had his predecessor, Lyndon B. Johnson) as being antithetical to the essential practices and character of free market capitalism.

He reversed himself upon receiving a letter from Richard E. Berlin, CEO of the Hearst chain of newspapers and magazines.[4] In the 1969 letter, Berlin intimated that failure of the law to pass would carry political consequences and hinted that support from Nixon would conversely help the President and his allies. The Nixon Administration supported the Act’s passage, and in the 1972 Presidential Campaign, every Hearst newspaper endorsed Nixon for reelection.

Afternoon sport

Bird watching is a favorite sport in our household, and Kiko is by far the most active participant!

She shifts between perching in the kitchen window, and pouring herself into this awkward spot spread between a kitchen stool and a small table looking out onto our front porch.

Minneapolis mayor testifies about chaos caused by federal invasion of his city

This is part of the testimony presented at an unofficial “shadow” Congressional hearing on Friday attended by 27 members of Congress.

From the website of U.S. Representatives Pramila Jayapal (WA-07), Ranking Member of the Subcommittee on Immigration, Integrity, Security:

This hearing featured testimony from a slate of local elected leaders, including Minnesota Attorney General Keith Ellison, Minneapolis Mayor Jacob Frey, and Saint Paul Mayor Kaohly Her, followed by a panel of witnesses including Executive Director of the ACLU of Minnesota Deepinder Mayell, Executive Director of Unidos MN Emilia González Avalos, Executive Director of Minnesota Chapter of the Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR-MN) Jaylani Hussein, Chief of Police of Mendota Heights Police Department Kelly McCarthy, and community members Patty and Mubashir.

“Our work aims to vindicate the rights of Minnesotans who have been victimized by their own government simply for exercising their First Amendment rights, to end the false sense of impunity that fuels the worst of federal agents’ misconduct, and to ensure that Minnesotans can assemble, observe, document and criticize – without fear of retaliation,” said Deepinder Mayell, Executive Director of the ACLU of Minnesota.

Minneapolis Mayor Jacob Frey spelled out the situation in clear terms.

Renewing our passports online

[Update: See the note at the end of the post.]

This is a surprising story of government efficiency.

Our passports expire late this year. However, some countries, including New Zealand, require passports to be valid for 6 months beyond a travelers entry date to the country, effectively ending their valid use for travel. Since we’re contemplating another visit to Auckland this summer, we decided it was time to renew.

So we were pleased to see that you can now renew a passport online. None of that earlier rigamarole of getting photos, filing out forms, delivering them to a post office and sending them off for processing.

Last Saturday, January 10, we went out into our garage mid-morning while filtered sunlight was streaming in through an upper window, turned on the light in the center of the garage, and found a place to stand against the blank white wall and took several photos to submit with the passport applications.

This proved to be the trickiest part of the whole online application procedure.

I then went through the application for my own renewal. It was straight forward. First, reenter and if necessary update the personal information on the old passport, provide the name and contact information for someone to be notified in case of emergency, upload your photo, and pay the $130 renewal fee. More if you also want to get a passport card for use driving to and from Canada or Mexico.

I had cropped our new passport photos to what I thought was a proper head & shoulder size. Well, my photo was rejected two, perhaps three times, saying it did not meet the guidelines. First, I lightened it just a bit. It was still rejected. Then a cropped it more tightly with my face centered in the photo, excess space on top removed, and just the top of my shoulders showing. On the third try, the system accepted the photo and I was rewarded with a message that the application had been successfully submitted.

You no longer have to return the old passport, but it is rendered immediately invalid when your online application is submitted.

Then we repeated the process with Meda’s renewal, with the same result except that this time I knew what to expect and it only took a single adjustment to successfully upload the photo.

We then both receive email receipts almost immediately.

Processing takes around 4-6 weeks
Processing time starts when your application is received by a passport agency or center. This does not include mailing time.

If there are no issues, you should receive your passport book around February 26, 2026.

On Tuesday, we received notices that our renewal applications were now being processed.

Okay, we prepared to wait.

But on Monday, just two days later, we both received notices an update.

Application Status: In Process

The U.S. Department of State has received your application for your passport book on 01/12/2026. We’re now reviewing your application and supporting documents.

You requested routine service when you applied. Routine service can take 4-6 weeks. Our processing times begin the day we receive your application at a passport agency or center, not the day you submit it.

But then came the first of two pleasant surprises!

On Wednesday, January 14, we both received notices from the U.S. Postal Service.

And this morning we got the next surprise when we checked the USPS tracking number.

This turnaround seems pretty remarkable. Our passports are scheduled to be delivered today, not in the 4-6 weeks we were initially warned about.

[Update. Perhaps I spoke too soon. Although my passport is scheduled to arrive today, Meda hasn’t gotten a USPS notice that it has been mailed. She did receive an update saying her application had been approved, the new passport printed, and it was ready for mailing, whiuch arrived at about the same time as my mailing notice. But she didn’t get the same USPS notice, and still hasn’t gotten one. So we’ll see. I hope we’re surprised and will have both renewals in hand by tonight.]