Reading the News Daily: A Civic Duty Beyond Headline Disinformation

In a public dispute that has captured attention across Mesa County, a controversy has emerged over the publication of legal notices, highlighting tensions between local media outlets and county officials.

The dispute centers on the legal requirement for counties to publish official notices in print newspapers, a practice that Commissioner Cody Davis and others suggest may be outdated and unnecessarily expensive in the digital age.

During an April 28 county commission meeting, The Business Times publisher Craig Hall presented a bid to publish the county’s legal notices, openly stating his interest in the revenue while simultaneously questioning the necessity of the print requirement itself.

“I won’t lie, I bid on this for the revenue,” Hall acknowledged in his presentation to commissioners. “But I’ll add this point. Even though I bid because the law says these notices must be published in a newspaper, I don’t think Mesa County should have to put them in print at all.”

Hall argued that the publishing landscape has changed dramatically since the original legal notice laws were established. “The county should be able to post these notices online as it does literally ALL of its business in today’s environment of transparency,” he stated, noting that interested parties can access notices through online searches, email alerts, or the Colorado Press Association’s website.

The following day, the Daily Sentinel published an article headlined “Mesa County looking to subvert legal notices requirement,” characterizing the commissioners’ discussion as an attempt to circumvent legal obligations rather than seek cost-effective solutions for mandated publications.

The article became a flashpoint in what appears to be a longstanding media rivalry in Mesa County, with Hall claiming the Sentinel’s coverage misrepresented both his comments and the commissioners’ intentions. He particularly objected to what he described as selective quoting and misleading framing of the discussion.

At issue is not just who publishes the notices but whether the requirement itself remains relevant. The Daily Sentinel, which reportedly bid $250,000 for the legal notices contract, has a financial stake in maintaining the current system. Critics of changing the requirement argue that removing print publication could reduce public transparency and access to information.

Defenders of modernization point out that print circulation has declined significantly over the past two decades, with Hall claiming the Sentinel has “lost nearly two-thirds of print readership” during his 26 years in the local market. This raises questions about the effectiveness of using print media as the primary vehicle for public notices.

The dispute highlights broader tensions in local journalism nationwide, where traditional newspapers face declining readership and revenue while digital alternatives emerge. Legal notice requirements represent one of the few guaranteed revenue streams for many legacy publications, making proposed changes particularly contentious.

Commissioner Davis reportedly noted during the meeting that The Business Times doesn’t meet all requirements under Colorado law to publish legal notices, though Hall disputes the characterization that his publication is “illegal” in any way.

The controversy also reflects changing dynamics in how citizens access government information. While legal notice laws were designed to ensure public awareness of official actions, the most effective channels for such communication continue to evolve with technology and media consumption habits.

County officials indicated their commitment to transparency while seeking cost-effective solutions, emphasizing that their concern is fiscal responsibility rather than limiting public access to information.

As the debate continues, Mesa County residents face questions about the balance between traditional information channels and modern alternatives, the cost of government communications, and the evolving role of local media in public discourse.