Six months ago, I moved from working through my own state press association on policy issues to helping track and navigate them nationwide. One thing became clear pretty quickly: the challenges local newspapers face don’t stay put. The same ideas, the same language and often the same risks show up again and again — just in different states and under different bill numbers.
That reality shapes nearly everything we’re doing through the America’s Newspapers State Advocacy Coalition. This role provides a broader view across the country, hundreds of bills and a wide range of approaches.
The work happens in the weeds: tracking legislation, reviewing bill language and flagging proposals that could quietly weaken — or reinforce — the role newspapers play in public notice and transparency.
Pressure on public notice continues to build
As has been the case for decades, public notice laws remain at the forefront. In many states, they are still one of the clearest ways newspapers are formally embedded in the democratic process. I’ve been reviewing new bills and regulatory changes that could shift how notices are handled, who controls placement and whether newspapers remain the legally designated channel.
The risks aren’t always obvious. More often they appear as quiet changes that allow notices to be redirected to state websites, platforms or vendors that lack the reach and accountability local newspapers provide.
In those situations, public notice laws may technically remain intact, but the outcome changes. Control shifts from statute to administration. Decisions move further away from local communities.
New policy attention on AI and advertising
We’re also seeing increased legislative attention on the use of artificial intelligence in advertising, particularly around political and election-related ads. Most of these proposals focus on disclosure, requiring ads that are created or materially assisted by AI to include clear labeling.
That has direct implications for newspapers, because AI tools are already embedded in advertising production. The concern isn’t transparency itself, but whether lawmakers fully understand how routinely AI is already used in everyday ad production.
Working in tandem with state press associations
Alongside this work, I’ve been working closely with state press associations to compare how similar issues are handled across the country. Seeing how one legislature defines public notice, digital publication or transparency standards becomes incredibly useful when another state starts down a similar path.
That cross-state comparison has become one of the coalition’s strongest tools. It allows us to share tested language, flag unintended consequences early and help associations avoid learning hard lessons after the fact.
We’ve also been responding to targeted research needs from state association directors, including work around vexatious or abusive public records requesters and comparisons of state policies on mugshot availability and other sensitive public-record issues. These are complicated topics with real legal and ethical consequences.
At the same time, ANSAC continues to grow. We now represent roughly half of all state newspaper associations in the country. That matters in size and more so in perspective.
Advocacy is most effective when it’s local
No national group or state association can replace the influence of a publisher speaking directly to their own lawmaker about how a bill affects their community, their newsroom and their ability to serve readers.
Advocacy works best when it is local, personal and proactive. ANSAC aims to reinforce that to our members and through our partners.
In short, the last few months have been about building infrastructure so newspapers aren’t just reacting as these issues resurface state by state. The goal is to help publishers and associations recognize the patterns earlier, engage sooner and shape the outcome before familiar risks become familiar problems.
Tony Baranowski is the state policy director with America's Newspapers. Connect with him at tbaranowski@newspapers.org.
