I was talking to my parents the other night and they were commenting on a recent edition of "Hometown News" that is delivered to their Ormond Beach home.They had observed that our company's weekly edition in Volusia County had so many stories and features that the daily newspaper in Daytona Beach seemed to miss. More puzzling, the Hometown News would actually publish other news stories on a more timely basis than the daily.
My Mom and Dad represent the kind of customers a newspaper company dreams about these days. They get two dailies delivered every morning. They look forward to the weekly, too. They make many buying decisions based on ads and they are occasional visitors to several newspaper Web sites.
They are also the kinds of customers newspaper companies once arrogantly believed would "always be there." Hence, they are the kinds of customers many newspapers have taken for granted.
In addition to noticing that the daily newspaper is chasing the weekly for some of the news, they also have noticed the daily is changing. Long-time features that they had come to expect when they pay their subscription fee are gone. The papers are getting thinner. Their observation: "Newspapers are really going downhill," my Mom told me the other night.
Ah, really? I mean, you weren't fooled? Damn. Some newspapers have been trying so hard to deceive you. Seems like a good idea for a book...
So, I am fighting off this summer cold and surfing a bit on the computer when I came across an item on Jim Romenesko's addictive Poynter.Org page. Dean Miller, executive editor of the Post Register in Idaho Fall "says the problem with (newspaper industry) layoff stories is that they provide zero context. He'd like to see a Romenesko Contextual Calculator that shows what percentage of staff is being laid off," Jim writes.
Read Miller's piece, "The Problem With Layoff Stories," here:
The Problem With Layoff Stories
Of course, I have to respond... Blame the cold meds.
While Dean Miller's idea for a contextual calculator seems a well-intentioned concept, it begs the larger question: Why start now?
In what other previous circumstances might a "contextual calculator" have been utilized?
Did the daily newspaper industry apply a contextual calculator when it began to cut reporting positions and features in the past decade with no other goal than to protect 25-40 percent NOI when revenue began to be siphoned off by the Digital Age?
Did the daily newspaper industry apply a contextual calculator when it removed readers' favorite features (TV listings, stock tables, local political cartoonists, local film reviewers, "chicken-dinner" news, reader-submitted items, calendars, et al) from its pages?
Does the daily newspaper industry apply a contextual calculator when it reports on ABC/FAS-FAX circulation figures but omits the layered realties of third-party sales, "the 25-percent rule," et al from readers and advertisers?
Does the daily newspaper industry apply a contextual calculator when errors are magnified daily because seasoned (i.e. "expensive") pro's are pushed out and replaced by cheap labor that makes rookie mistakes?
Does the daily newspaper industry apply a contextual calculator when it departs from basic customer service like delivering a paper precisely where the reader requests it and guaranteeing a delivery time?
Does the daily newspaper industry apply a contextual calculator when it increasingly farms out every job from reporting to photography to newspaper delivery to free-lance non-employees?
Does the daily newspaper industry apply a contextual calculator when it rejects audience-friendly zoning opportunities and creative publishing tools like address-specific delivery to embrace a one-size-fits-all methodology for a broad spectrum of diverse peoples over diverse geographies?
Does the daily newspaper industry apply a contextual calculator when it stands by and allows the death of photojournalism as a valued and respected practice?
Does the daily newspaper industry apply a contextual calculator when it promotes the death of a "local voice" as it drives columnists, editorial cartoonists and daily, local editorial opinions from its pages?
Does the daily newspaper industry apply a contextual calculator when it abandons its watchdog role in a community and succumbs to the trend of "light" news?
Does the daily newspaper industry apply a contextual calculator when, in the Internet push, it fails to note that so many weak Web sites are really a front for the lucrative bonanza some publishers envision when they can stop buying newsprint by the ton and stop spending so much money to deliver a "newspaper?"
"Clarity Movement?" If the request is to be clear or even fair, then there is much that must be put into context. It strikes me, however, as a little late in the game to cry "Context!" in the aftermath of so much daily newspaper industry arrogance.
I know I am painting with a rather broad brush and I know that good people are doing some good work. There are some innovative publishers and editors working to create and broaden the intuitive media perspective and to invest in the various futures. The problem is that too many others are doing the cut and run. So, before anyone works too hard to apply context to certain aspects of the dilemma, perhaps the entire situation needs an honest evaluation.
More later,
Mark
6 comments:
Well, I agree with one thing...you're taking too many cold meds.
Save your energy for the 500 items in your in box at work.
Seriously, I'm surprised your brain is functioning well enough to create such a long, cohesive thought.
Now go back to bed!
I love the cold meds, they fuel that energy that allows you to do what you do best - call a spade a spade.
It was painful to watch as all those scenarios you've listed played out in the workplace. I witnessed a mid-level manager tell an employee, "That's our policy, the customers will just have to get over it!" Amazing that someone can believe they'll be successful with that type of attitude.
I fantasized that someone would stand up in a meeting where the subject of "saving newsprint" was being discussed and shout - "SAVE NEWSPRINT? Well, just don't publish the paper!"
Miller's viewpoint is a perfect example of why the U.S. newspaper industry is broken.
The time for "context" has long passed. What is happening, however, is that these long-entrenched "managers" who have lived off of their employees' misery for a decade are now starting to see a threat to their phony-baloney jobs, and laying off more and more staff doesn't seem to be holding profitability at the ridiculous, unsustainable levels of yesteryear.
I'm getting all worked up now, too, but when you put all the things Mark mentioned together with a team of reporters that cares less about "partnering" with local government than keeping officials honest, and you might actually start to get some of that lost profitability back, "context" or not.
Wow! Some great comments! All from folks I admire!
Don't worry Gretchen: I'm feeling better! I have already been working on the inbox and I will see you Monday!
Suzanne's horror story of customer service is just one example of an even one poor manager can impact one organization. Sadly, it's not an isolated incident. I sat in a newsroom in 1987 and listened to an editor repeatedly tell a reader exactly why his picture would not be published: Because other readers didn't want to see it!
Ryun: Glad to hear from you! I hope this finds you well. You are one of those great talents from the old NWH days. Man, it seems like a long time!
And you are right: Content, not context, is king!
Mark
What's unfortunate is that newspapers have lost sight of what is important in their "quest" to enlighten and enrich the lives of their customers. Newspapers care more about the bottom line than they do the customer or the employees serving the customer.
Yes, one of the missions of newspapers is to make money, but it shouldn't be at the expense of the customer.
Newspapers can try to use all the gimmicks they can because the "research" says they are supposed to. But the research means nothing if the newspaper doesn't have a clue about the community.
It's unfortunate, but the quest to make money has resulted in a lost vision for many newspapers. Newspapers are being operated with a top down mentality and sadly, these "top" managers really have no connection with their community. There are many good ideas happening in the newspaper industry and all this "quick-hit, reader friendly" stuff is a great concept.....unless there is no content.
Perhaps I am old-fashoned a bit, but to be honest, I read the newspaper for news. I am afraid that the Internet and the various "news" outlets have trumped the newspaper.
Whereas I enjoy the human interest portion and local portion, newscasts shown from Peoria in Bloomington/Normal, Illinois have shifted some focus to local Bloomington issues.
The newspaper, the Daily Pantagraph, is online and not charging money--which to me seems silly. Why buy the paper when I can read it online? Further, the paper online has an interactive blog feature that any moron can add their commentaries without fear of having to stand up to their name--people use "fake" names and the like. This blogging stuff is a bit of an insult because in order to write a letter, the paying customer must include full name, address, and phone--a blogger need not offer anything.
Papers, in my opinion, need to offer more localized coverage and even turn away some forms of national media. As an example, Bill Maas--NFL commentator on FOX NFL, was busted in Peoria for a weapons and drug charge with his twenty-seven-year-old companion on their way to a wedding. I read the exact same AP story from a Peoria Paper, The Pantagraph, Yahoo NFL, and AOL. Why not offer a true investigative report?
Sadly, what I see in education seems to happen in the news media: new people are coming out of college and try for quicker and easier methods to complete the job. I cannot count how many times I have seen carbon-copy lessons from new teachers they have purchased online or wherever. Seems that reporters are following the same path of laziness.
Sorry for the ramble.
Post a Comment