Saturday, August 04, 2007

Post No. 200: In Defense of Film Critics

One of the most revealing essays about the muddled minds at the helm of daily newspapers these days can be found in the latest edition of American Journalism Review. You can read it here: 
 
The End of The Affair
 
The article documents the growing trend of eliminating film critics at newspapers. Faced with plunging advertising revenue and audiences, masters of printing mechanisms across the nation are eliminating all sorts of local voices: Columnists, film reviewers, auto critics, editorial cartoonists, etc. Film critics seem to be at the top of the list. The rationale? According to the article: 
 
"We've made a strategic decision that our future rests in providing readers unique local stories'" and other local content, Bert Roughton, the (Atlanta Journal Constitution)'s managing editor for print, wrote in an e-mail interview.'To be consistent with this strategy, we've decided not to use our staff to produce reviews that we can get from other sources.'" 
 
When you get editors bleating about "strategic interest" instead of fighting for a well-rounded voice, well, you've captured MY attention. Daily newspaper editors, under the thumb of masters of printing mechanisms, are more afraid of losing their jobs than they are of providing a great product. So, they are allowing the guts of their newspapers – the heart – to be destroyed and replaced by boring, rehashed wire news from far away. Less editing! Same pay! Win-win! 
 
On the day I began to write this, Aug. 3, here's what the A section of the AJC contained, according to the newspaper's Web site. Watch that "strategic decision" at play: 
 
• WINNERS CAP CAREERS - Local feature about local athletes at Georgia Tech. 
• New mother was 'really, really lucky' - Bridge collapse story from wire. 
• Hard questions, fading hope: Searchers frustrated by risky conditions - Bridge collapse story from wire. 
• Plenty here in need of repairs, but state says none unsafe - Bridge collapse localization 
• Common chemical rouses concern - Wire story on BPA. 
• Safe site sought for talks on S. Korean hostages - Wire story on Afghanistan story. 
• Senate's vote boosts funding for kids' health - Bureau story. 
• Senators want Gonzales out - Wire story. 
• Panel gets little from Bush aide: Rove underling fails to shed light on prosecutors' firings - Wire story. 
• Baghdad taps run dry - Wire story. 
• Senate approval sends ethics bill to president - Wire story. 
• Bush: No small change: Spending plans' $22 billion gulf 'a lot of money' - Wire story. 
• Study: Moms quick to stop breast-feeding - wire story. 
• NATION IN BRIEF: Bush aides face questions - Collection of wire stories. 
• Court rules against insured Katrina victims - Wire story. 
• WORLD IN BRIEF: Serbs deny herd at risk - Collection of wire stories. 
• House votes to give troops guaranteed time at home - Wire story. 
• IRAQ DEVELOPMENTS - Collection of wire stories. 
• Silence, please! Atlanta gets its first Zen master - Local feature. 
 
Lead art was a massive picture from the Minnesota bridge collapse. The local zen master DID get a mug shot on A1. Now, to be fair, the AJC also has a local news, or "Metro," section. But it seems odd to me that a newspaper attempting to brand itself with "unique local" news would devote so much of its main section with dry rehashes of wire reports. 
 
I was trading e-mails the other day with Jeff Westhoff, the long-time Northwest Herald film critic relegated to freelancing when that paper eliminated his full-time role last year, and I pointed him to that article. I have always enjoyed Jeff both as a great newsroom character with a dry wit and as a reviewer (though he and I NEVER agree on animated movies). He wrote: 
 
"Naturally I agree with Philip Lopate and Douglas McLennan of ArtsJournal when they say that a film critic gives a newspaper a unique voice. Local coverage is not the same as local voice. News stories provide necessary information, but giving readers staff personalities they can identify with or fume at should also necessary for newspapers." 
 
Then he shared a great story that illustrates the connection readers can have with their local film critic. 
 
"As we know, newspaper editors are agonizing over ways to entice younger readers to pick up a paper or add a hit to the paper's Web site tally. In May I was invited to speak at a student journalists conference at McHenry County College. The organizer said I was by far the most popular choice and though my two sessions were in a large room, people had to be turned away both times." 
 
I wonder how many staffers at any newspaper would be able to claim the same drawing power? Maybe I should ask Bert Roughton at the AJC. 
 
There's even a more insidious concept being played out here. At the same time that long-time, full-salaried, local voices are being drummed out of the news pages, many newspapers are also rushing to recreate themselves on the Internet. I have previously documented these ham-handed efforts. 
 
As professional, credible, articulate voices are eliminated, many newspaper Web sites have opened their doors to unmoderated "comments" from readers. One of the most horrific examples of this is at the daily newspaper here in Brevard County, Florida Today. 
 
Florida Today 

While comments are a well-intentioned idea that is supposed to reflect the freedom of the Internet, here is what normally happens: About two dozen "regulars" who have nothing but time on their hands make rude comments on every story that is posted. They fight with each other, shout down others who try to add to the mix, make wild assertions over guilt and/or innocence that responsible journalists would never make and they dominate a newspaper Web site's voice. 
 
And that voice is ugly and disrespectful. 
 
Is that what we've come to embrace? Is that the model for the future? A good newspaper - and even its Web site - should reflect the values of the entire community it serves as well as the ideals to which it strives. 
 
There should be an effort at every newspaper that is staring into the abyss to understand the value of its total package: News, views, ads, functionality (which includes everything from customer service to circulation service to print quality). These should be seen as the four legs of a chair: The chair becomes weakened and more like to collapse every time you whittle away at a leg. Readers expect the newspaper to have many views; to have a local voice. They can already buy a generic newspaper; it's called USA Today. 
 
Jeff made this great point: 
 
"Everyone keeps saying newspapers are dying. I say that's only because they're commiting suicide. For example, the underlying mentality for getting rid of staff film critics cited in this article seems to be, 'So many film reviews are available on the Internet.' So these editors will surrender to the Internet that easily? They should be saying, 'Sure you can find hundreds of reviews for this movie on the Internet, but few will be as stylishly written or as thought-provoking as the one written by our critic. And our readers care about that.'" 
 
Actually, Jeff, giving a staff film reviewer his own space in the newspaper and an emerging role on the Internet with a blog that is simulcast and co-branded on MySpace.Com, FaceBook.Com and even Blogger.Com would seem to give a newspaper an advantage, especially if it truly sought those who intersect with those varied demographics. It would lay the groundwork for creating a true Internet community. 
 
I'll discuss that concept later. Thanks, Jeff, for sharing your great insight. 
 
More later, 
 

Mark 

2 comments:

Suzanne said...

Westhoff is my favorite movie reviewer, bar none, and I agree with his comments. There is a distinction to be drawn between "local coverage and local voice." Perhaps it would be difficult to quantify but you know it when you see it. When there's a publisher and an editor with a vision and committment the results stand head and shoulders above the rest.

He's also correct in his assertion that newspapers are committing suicide. It's messy to watch and as a reader and consumer you've got to shake your head and ask...what are they thinking?....or why don't they listen to their customers?

I'm sure there are editors struggling to hold on to their jobs, I've seen it for myself, but I learned many, many years ago that you have to decide what you believe and trust your talent and approach the job as if you didn't need it. In the end no amount of placating will tame the beast and you'll lose your job anyway.

They can crow about providing unique local stories, but the truth is that not one of our regional papers actually delivers on that promise. Again, a unique local story/voice literally jumps off the page and grabs you.

Are we going to miss the film critics, editorial cartoonists, local business writers? You bet we will, and readers will continue to march with their feet. You know who else I miss? I miss a good social columnist. I want someone to get me into the A list parties. I want to go to the Delnor Ball if only on someone's coattails. When I was a young stay-at-home mom I lived on that stuff. Yes!! There was a world outside of raising kids and I could participate, if only through the written word.

I'm sick, sick, sick to death of wire stories. By the time they've been edited and hashed down they're sometimes incomprehensible. Besides, as the newspaper heads are fond of touting in other areas, it's material I can get anywhere.

And lastly.......please, please give me something to read. I'm drive wild by full pages of newsprint 80% of which is advertising advertising. I gaze at these pages and say, "What exactly am I supposed to be reading on this page? There's no information here." The ad-to-news ratio keeps climbing which only says to me you're trying to save newsprint. As I've said before, if you're trying to save newsprint just don't print the paper.

Mark, maybe you can answer a question for me. I was viewing a very interesting documentary entitled, "Our Time", which chronicled an election in Tehran in which women were being allowed to run. In one shot there was an image of a street corner with no less that 25 different newspapers for sale. Why would that be so in Afghanistan and in the U.S. you can barely find any diversity?

Mark M. Sweetwood said...

Hey Suzanne!

There are several issues that come to play in terms of the quantity of newspapers available to the public. In Iraq, for instance, there are many, many newspapers and a less reliance on the Internet. Why? Because there is an average of an hour of electricity per day.

Another difference is ownership. I would guess that the average owner of an Iraqi newspaper is not seeking 20-40 percent ROI. In the U.S., newspaper companies seeking a high level of profit have been eating each other for the past two decades and consolidation has followed. A couple of generations ago, it was not uncommon to find major (and minor) American cities with more than one newspaper. Now, that is the rarity. And when a singular voice replaces multiple voices, those who don't appreciate the remaining game in town have gone elsewhere for their news.

That is a self-inflicted wound which has impacted the tradition of reading newspapers. You and I may have grown up in household with more than one newspaper, but with only one newspaper per town, the current generation has grown up without a household newspaper reading habit.

That is not the case elsewhere. In London, for instance, there is still a strong tradition of newspaper competition which has naturally driven newspaper readership. According to Wikipedia.Com, here's what you can find on the typical London newsstand:

Broadsheet format
•Daily Telegraph (est. 1855) / The Sunday •Telegraph (est. 1961) — owned by David and Frederick Barclay - generally taken to be a Conservative newspaper.
•Financial Times (est. 1888) — owned by Pearson PLC A business oriented daily.
•Sunday Times (est. 1822) — owned by Rupert Murdoch's News Corporation
Berliner format
•The Guardian (est. 1821) / The Observer (est. 1791) — owned by the Scott Trust; The Guardian became Berliner on 12 September 2005, followed by The Observer on 8 January 2006.
Compact format
•The Independent (est. 1986) / Independent on Sunday (est. 1990) — owned by Tony O'Reilly; daily became compact only in May 2004, followed by Sunday edition in October 2005.
•The Times (est. 1785) — owned by Rupert Murdoch's News Corporation; solely compact format available from November 2004.
Middle-market papers
•Daily Express (est. 1900) / Sunday Express (est. 1918) — owned by Richard Desmond's Northern and Shell plc; broadsheet until 1977, now published in the compact format.
•Daily Mail (est. 1896) / Mail on Sunday (est. 1982) — owned by Lord Rothermere's Daily Mail and General Trust plc; broadsheet until 1971, now published in the tabloid format.
•Metro — owned by Daily Mail and General Trust plc; distributed free; working towards national status, wide availability in the major cities makes it the UK's 4th highest circulation paper.
Tabloids
•Daily Star (est. 1978) / Daily Star Sunday
•The People (est. 1881) — owned by Trinity Mirror
•The Daily Mirror (est 1903) / Sunday Mirror (est. 1915) — owned by Trinity Mirror
•The Daily Sport / The Sunday Sport
•The Sun (est. 1964) / News of the World (est. 1843) — owned by News Corporation

I hope that gives you some measure of perspective. Newspapers are quick to blame "the Internet" for their woes but are less inclined to accept responsibility for self-inflicted wounds like squashing competition and killing the local voice.

Mark

Image Hosted by ImageShack.us NFLShop.com Memorabilia
NFLShop.com