Local news coverage isn't our future ... it's our present.

Local news media used to have a stranglehold on local opinion.

If people wanted to get their views to a mass audience, they'd write letters to the editor. To this day, local letters remain one of the most popular components of any newspaper.

Then came talk radio. A thoughtful person could speak through the airwaves. Then as talk radio proliferated, it embraced any nitwit or nabob willing to natter negatively.

Now, there's the Internet. Any man, woman, or child can host a blog to discuss the affairs of the world (and many do). People can sit at their computers and read the opinions of commentators and newspapers across the globe. They can listen to foreign broadcasts on satellite TV and radio.

There is no way that community editorialists can compete with that proliferation of national and international opinions.

But why would we want to?

It may make us feel good to opine about the state of the world, but to whom are we talking?

Rare indeed is the newspaper or broadcast outlet that can count George Bush or Kofi Annan among its readers/viewers/ listeners.

To do more than survive--to be effective as editorialists--we must focus on the roots of our craft:

* Know our audience.

* Be timely.

* Be local.

* Be informative and interesting.

* Be opinionated.

* Above all, be accurate.

Today's--and tomorrow's--opinion sections can best serve readers and viewers by becoming the opinion provider for our communities, giving insights, ideas, and information that people can find nowhere else. Nobody knows "local" as we do; at least no one else should.

We may not sway the U.S. presidency--no matter who occupies the White House--but we can change our communities. We can inspire (or irritate) residents to get involved in local and regional issues. We can point the way for decision-makers. We can root out problems in government and force changes.

And we can have a heckuva lot of fun while doing so.

Granted, it's often faster in our time-pressed days to write on national/global issues than local ones--especially in smaller editorial shops. We can grab a few stories off the wire and churn out a general, plausible editorial.

Afterward, we may receive a few great-job or you're-out-of-your-gourd calls from readers and viewers. We may bask in the glory of knowing that people listen to us. Yeah, right. All we've done is aggravate the usual suspects or preached to the same old choir.

And filled space.

The editorial that keeps coming to mind is one from a metro newspaper years ago. It said something to the effect of, "XYZ is a terrible problem. Congressional Quarterly described it thusly...." A bulleted list of points from CQ followed. The editorial then concluded with, "Congress must take immediate action to resolve XYZ."

Golly, gee whiz!

Local editorials require far more reporting and precise writing, and generate a greater response. The audience also comprises the experts. The readers/viewers know firsthand the traffic, schools, city council, dogcatcher candidates--you name it--addressed in the day's editorials. They can tell whether the editorialists have done their research or are just ranting.

Readers/viewers care passionately about these local issues. So, whether they agree or disagree, they'll pay close attention to these opinions.

Does this mean editorialists should ignore the big issues in D.C. or abroad? No.

But we have to make them relevant to local residents and decision-makers. We have to show that the old-time newspaper mantra of "avoid Afghanistanism"--covering events in obscure countries--was wrong. (Certainly, our world would be a different place if we'd all been paying more attention to Afghanistan, making it relevant to our audiences and our politicians.)

Examples of bringing such issues home to readers: Afghanistan isn't just a faraway country; it's where readers/viewers' friends and family serve in our state National Guards. China is a reason why a local metal company has cut its work force. Indonesia and neighboring countries are where neighbors volunteered in disaster relief with a locally based charity. The Marshall Islands are the native land for a growing number of students enrolling in our schools.

In the same vein, immigration, Medicare prescriptions, and No Child Left Behind aren't just national political debates. They affect the daily lives of residents, and stir up the neighbors.

We can make these issues local. Because "local" is not just our past; it is our future.

Dick Hughes is editorial page editor of the Statesman Journal in Salem, Oregon, and an NCEW board member. E-mail [e-mail]