klickimediablog

2009-08-25T12:02:00.001-05:00

Where have I been?

For those of you looking for the latest of my rants, raves and ruminations, I've moved my blog to Wordpress. Check out the latest at this link.

Thanks for following!

2009-07-28T12:37:00.010-05:00

Is Twitter a threat to journalism? Hardly

I don't want to ruminate on the Twitter phenomena, but I can't help but chuckle at a recent essay by journalism instructor Melissa Hart, who feels that Twitter is taking away the very heart of journalism. Reporting in 140 characters or less, she maintains, can get the facts but takes the soul out of the story -- and in turn out of journalism as a whole.

It's unfortunate that a journalism instructor -- one that is charged with teaching future journalists to work with the new tools of the trade -- is naive to the role social networking is playing in the profession ... and why Twitter and other social networking sites are so important to it.

I certainly agree that a news tweet isn't the same as a 1,600-word, well researched investigative piece. But tweets are not meant to be investigative, and Twitter was never meant to replace other media.

The uniqueness of social media -- Twitter, Facebook, Flickr, etc. -- is that it can get the word out fast. There's a demonstration in Tehran opposing the government's election. Soldiers take to the streets to keep the crowds at bay. Social media reports the scene as it happens, one snippet at a time. It's real-time news, delivered at a speed unheard of before.

There is no time for depth and detail. It's just the fact, and the events, as it happens. That is social media in it's purest form.

News organizations still get the depth and detail in their news, which is posted to their web sites. Then Twitter becomes the hook to get readers back to the story, much like a "50% off" placard in a store window gets you inside to view the goods, and hopefully pick up something else. Yes, in these scenarios, Twitter does become simply a headline service, but how is that different than the town criers of the days of old, or the paperboy's chant of "extra, extra, read all about it" on a street corner?

Instead of shaking a fist and cursing Twitter, our educators should be more focused on how to show students how to use Twitter, Facebook, et al, as supplemental tools in their roles as journalists. In Ms. Hart's essay, she mentions students who were enlightened by going out and finding stories. Why not teach them to use the basic fundamentals of journalist to craft a fine story, then show how to use blogging, Twitter, Facebook, etc., to get readers to the story.

For example, Ms. Hart cites a seminar with Boston Globe editor Martin Baron, in which students around her were tweeting away during the seminar. Granted, the students were obviously focused on reporting the event "as it happens." Couldn't Ms. Hart take that example and, through her teaching, show the students how to develop a more in-depth story with the feeling and pathos she described? Then, once the story is written, why not post it to the student's blog or Facebook page, and use Twitter to link to it?

After all, in the real world, these students may be called on by a future employer to write the story "as it happens," and later rewrite it for a web and/or print product.

The problem with journalism is not Twitter. The problem lies with those in the industry and those entrusted with our future who refuse to recognize and adapt the new and innovative into the core of our profession.

2009-07-23T20:55:00.013-05:00

Are you a twit if you're not on Twitter?

I'm amused by the blowback among the social media masses over this week's Late Show with David Letterman. Dave admits to actor Kevin Spacey that he doesn't use Twitter.

Spacey pulls out his BlackBerry and shows Dave just how easy Twitter is. Dave responds he "can't afford it" and later, says it reminds him of "a waste of time."

The Twittersphere burned up the next day with folks basically labeling Letterman a Luddite for dissing the Twitter world and choosing to avoid it.

However, I think it's better that Dave avoid Twitter. We already have too many celebrities and other folks who don't get Twitter clogging up the bandwidth.

Remember, Twitter is all about conversation. It's the world's largest water cooler. What you get out of the conversation depends on what you put into it. You follow, you get followed. You interact.

As a Twitter user, I try to follow those who follow me, figuring that I may someday learn something from them. And the conversations at times have been very interesting and enlightening.

Unfortunately, the conversation has been diluted by celebs who treat followers like a body count...the more you have, the higher your stature. Much of the glitterati on Twitter now treat the conversation one-year. They have many followers, but follow few. I'm sure psychologists can explain that people feel the need to follow a celeb on Twitter as a personal fan club or to live vicariously through their lives.

But are they really connected with them? I looked up a few key celebs on Twubble, and here are their stats as of July 22:

Oprah Winfrey: 16,846 following; follows 43
Ashton Kutcher: 2,901,305 following; follows 187
Kevin Spacey: 840,078 following, follows 4(I was very disappointed by this, considering Spacey acted like he got the concept when he was on Letterman.)

I can understand that it would be next to impossible to follow hundreds of thousands of folks, but these numbers show that for Twitter, their conversation is strictly one-way.

They have put the Twit in Twitter. They have cast a pall on Twitter's potential to become a remarkable social networking and marketing portal.

(I must note that not all celebs are Twitter abusers. There are a few, like WLS-TV weatherman Jerry Taft, who understand it's about the dialog and contribute to the conversation.)

So Dave, thanks for not getting on the Twitter. Kevin, if you're serious about Twitter, start listening to those who follow you. Oprah and Ashton, thanks, but you can move on to the next fad now ... maybe finding a life in the Twit competition below (Thanks to Monty Python's John Cleese, who incidentally is on Twitter and does provide some wonderfully funny tweets)

The rest of us...we'll forgive the interruption and get back to the conversation.

2009-07-17T21:06:00.009-05:00

That's the way it is

The man who was my inspiration to pursue a career in journalism has died. Walter Cronkite was 92.

Dubbed "the most trusted man in America," he was the man who set the standard of television news anchormen -- a standard rarely met by the majority of today's standard bearers. He was articulate, intelligent, inquisitive and authoritative, but never lost touch with his human qualities. I cried as he choked up on the announcement of John Kennedy's death, and cheered with his exclamation of "wow!" as Neil Armstrong first stepped onto the moon's surface.

He was a professional who could walk with the dignitaries and the downtrodden and tell their stories with authority and compassion. He was also a person who shared his love of the world and the wonder of man's achievements with us all.

Godspeed, Walter.

2009-07-16T14:14:00.005-05:00

Brits invade New York...again!

Way off topic today. Paul McCartney's performance on "Late Night with David Letterman" had to be one of the best TV performances ever. Sir Paul and his band played a couple of numbers while perched atop the marquee of the Ed Sullivan Theater (in homage to the Beatles' famous 1969 'rooftop concert' at Apple Studios in London).

It's incredible to think it was 45 years ago that Paul and his fellows Brits first performed in the legendary New York theater. Letterman was brilliant to pay homage to that with this unique concert.

2009-07-13T13:43:00.009-05:00

Can free be profitable?

I've been reading Chris Anderson's latest work, "Free," and am finding it a great argument against the movement afoot by newspapers to begin charging for its online content.

Anderson's book focuses on why the adding cost to a product does not necessarily give it value, and why giving something for "free" does not diminish its value. In fact, free can be a door into profitability.

The problem for newspapers, though, is that those who are looking at charging content are basing it on old business models. However, we're finding those model are no longer working in print. Why should we expect them to work online?

Forcing people to pay for what they got for free will not build readership and future customers. Anderson points to a computer hardware website that has used a business model of providing free hardware in raw form, or completed versions at cost. The model for its success:

1. Build a community around free information or advice on a particular topic.
2. With that community's help, design some products that people want, and return the favor by making it free in a raw form.
3 Let those with more money than time/skills/risk-tolerance buy the more polished versions of those products. (That may turn out to be almost everyone)
4. Do it again and again, building a 40 percent profit margin into the products to pay bills.

Newspapers are devoting time and effort to thinking up new ideas that might or might not work. They're hiring consultants and professionals to tell them where they should focus and what they think will sell.

How many have actually opened a dialog with their readers to find out what they want, let alone who they are? And, once they have, why not offer a tiered system that provide free information in raw form, but premium services that could save readers time and inconvenience at cost?

The free horse is out of the barn, and it's time to look at providing providing services that let readers ride the horse, at cost.

Anderson offers a free version of his book at this link. Yes, it is a raw version that cannot be downloaded, but it is free.

2009-07-09T20:46:00.003-05:00

Is this the new revenue model for newspapers?

Another painfully funny video, this time from Slate:

2009-07-02T13:41:00.013-05:00

It was nice while it lasted

Blogger Jeffery Pijanowski notes that in June, only 277 newspaper layoffs were announced. It was the lowest number of monthly layoffs in 2009.

While it provides a glimmer of hope, it was shadowed by the revelation that Gannett Corp. plans to lay off about 1,400 people later this month -- more than four times the June total.

C'est le vie.

* Who would even think of starting up a new newspaper right now? OK, maybe GateHouse Media. The company with a reputation of buying into the industry at a bad time is starting the Cape Cod Day in Massachusetts.

GateHouse may have the right idea on focusing on small, community newspapers. But given the current economic climate, the flat advertising market and the fact that Cape Cod already has an established daily, you have to wonder whose Kool Aid Gatehouse execs have been drinking.

* RIP to another "soft parade" venture. Last week The Seattle Courant, a community-focused online news product, closed up shop after a one-year battle.

The Courant's founder, Keith Vance, explains the main reason he ended the venture was lack of money. It takes a lot of it to create a newsroom that can compete with the established media, and while the intent was noble, the business model was not sufficient.

Maybe Vance could get some tips from the former Rocky Mountain News folks, who may have a combo that will keep them going for a while. The group of investors, ex-RMN staffers and bloggers will launch the Rocky Mountain Independent on Monday, hoping to continue what they tried to do with the InDenverTimes.com site earlier this year (before their financial backers pulled out).

Using the name "Rocky Mountain" in the site's name is a good way to leverage the old Rocky's brand into their site ... and hopefully without E.W. Scripps getting their corporate knickers in a snit. And ... most importantly ... it'll be interesting to see if Denver readers still want their Rocky.

2009-06-30T12:01:00.017-05:00

The Short Attention Span News Generation, brought to you by Twitter

Two major news events in the past week have shown again why Twitter is a major player in the distribution of news. In the streets of Tehran, Twitter had a crucial role in getting out news and events pertaining to the questionable free elections. As their counterparts in China found out, the Iranian government can shut out the mainstream media, but is almost powerless in stopping the populace from sending out Tweets and pictures of the violent government crackdown on the street.

And in California, the news of the death of pop superstar Michael Jackson took life on Twitter even before the mainstream news outlets were able to get a handle on it. The celebrity web site TMZ, upon getting first notification that Jackson was transported to a hospital, immediately tweeted it out to its followers. Like a wildfire, those followers retweeted TMZ's message to their followers, and so on, as so on. Just about everyone knew that Jackson had died by the time AP sent out its alert some two hours later.

The phenomenon was noted by an AP reporter in New York, who was on a bus when a passenger got on and announced that Jackson had just died. Immediately, the reporter said, everyone around her pulled out their smartphones to confirm what they heard and pass it along to their friends.

Media guru Jeff Jarvis compares Twitter's power in breaking news to the power cable news had in its heyday. He points out it's sad that a dead celebrity is capable of pushing out a cultural revolution. However, noting that Iran still trends on Twitter, he has hope.

What this is more indicative of, however, is the very issues that is killing newspapers and, in a sense, substantive journalism. Twitter, Facebook, YouTube and social media in general are becoming the news source for the short-attention span news generation. The news is short, to the point and relevant. No ups, no extras.

What it lacks is substance. You get who, what, when, where ... and possibly how. What is missing is why. But the SASN generation isn't necessarily interested in why ... especially if it goes beyond 140 characters.

As Jarvis points out, this is no different from what cable news has done for decades, the only difference now is that viewers lose their interest long before the cable outlets do. He is correct that folks today would rather discuss Jackson's death with their friends than with Al Sharpton. Consumers have been experted to death by cable news...they'd rather analyze on their own terms with folks they know.

What does this mean for substantive news? It will continue, but will likely play a secondary role to immediacy in the coming years. That means news organizations must be prepared to do both in order to survive. They can no longer hang their hat on analysis and in-depth news. The audience will be there, but it will be smaller and those who grew up enjoying depth and breadth die off.

But the SASN generation ... like the Headline News generation ... is fed quickly and constantly. Once the essentials have been exhausted, they will move on to a new alert. Like Don Quixote, social news will slay a windmill until they grow weary, then travel along the plain to the next windmill.

They are the next audience news organizations will need to focus on. But the SASN generation won't know it, because I lost them 6 paragraphs ago.

2009-06-16T19:57:00.008-05:00

Can chicken dinners be a golden egg?

Back in the 1980s, Chicago Tribune editor Jim Squires, when asked about the stunning growth of suburban daily newspapers encroaching on his paper's circulation, blithely responded "People love chicken-dinner news."

Now, the Trib in the 80s was not known for spending time on "chicken dinner" news -- a metaphor for the ultra-local news ranging from village board meetings to school play stories and Rotary Club dinners -- but learned once suburban daily and weekly papers gnawed away their market dominance. This was the news that would wind up taped (or held by magnets)to refrigerator doors across the nation. A six-part series on official malfeasance is true journalism, but what fed readers' appetite for news was the small picture of their neighbor's kid in the school play, the listing on what is playing at the community theater, the notice on when should they be putting their trash out on the curb.

The beauty of the chicken dinner news was that you necessarily didn't need a reporting staff to dig up the information and turn it over. People in the community are dying to give you this stuff. Sure, in many cases it's poorly written and you need a someone to translate it into meaningful copy, but the news is there, coming in a stead stream.

Flash forward to today. Papers are cutting back on staff and coverage because they can't afford to produce a product like they did in the 80s. So thinner papers that are publishing less frequently are going out to readers.

But, in the community, the chicken dinner news still exists! And they still want to get noticed.

So why haven't local papers taken advantage of that on the web? Taking the term community to mean "those with similar interests," why aren't more papers forming community portals for that information?

Why aren't they providing social-media-like sites that allow posting of the uber-local information. Why don't these portals provide virtual "refrigerator doors," which allow users to post stories and photos generated from other sites, and allows them to share with friends and family -- like a local-level version of Facebook.

These portals could draw readership and interest to local advertisers, who could also tout their own businesses and share with these communities.

Chicken dinner news could be a golden egg for readership and potential revenues.

So why aren't we paying more attention to it?

2009-06-11T23:20:00.005-05:00

Painfully funny

The Daily Show's report on the New York Times is wonderfully funny, and painfully true in many cases.

And...how many of you have wanted to toss a laptop like that?

The Daily Show With Jon Stewart

Mon - Thurs 11p / 10c

End Times

thedailyshow.com

Daily Show
Full Episodes

Political Humor

Newt Gingrich Unedited Interview

2009-06-10T13:17:00.013-05:00

Flotsam for today

* I've read a lot of positive things about the newspaper industry over the past several weeks.

And then I read this.

The Newport, R.I., Daily News will charge readers for access to news online.

A lot.

In fact, the Daily News is charging $345 a year for online only access ... more than the $245 online and home delivery charge, and considerably more than the $145 home delivery only.

“Our goal was to get people back into the printed product,” publisher Albert K. Sherman, Jr. tell the Nieman Foundation. He said some readers, when hearing about the plan, asked “why would they pay for it on the Internet when they can go buy the printed paper? And that’s perfect — that’s what we want.”

So this small-town daily is taking the sheepherder's approach to regain readership, without regard to readers' wants. Sheep can't think for themselves, but I have a feeling the people in Newport are much, much smarter than sheep.

They'll figure out where to get their online news for less, even if the Daily News is the only information source in the market.

At those prices, it won't be for long.

* I fear for the Boston Globe's future after the Newspaper Guild rejected a 10 percent staff pay cut earlier this week. The newspaper's owner, New York Times Inc., afterwards declared the talks at an impasse and instituted a 23 percent pay cut across the board. Now NYT is looking at the possibility of selling the Globe .

The union's effort to shield its members from the economic realities of the industry, where a 10 percent pay cut would be welcomed in lieu of layoffs and pay cuts that, in some cases, have accumulated beyond 30 percent. As a result, NYT's effort to shed the newspaper from its umbrella could put the Globe with a even more stingy boss.

Newspapers are not a popular investment nowadays. The Miami Herald, Chicago Sun-Times and San Francisco Chronicle have been on the lot for years without attracting a single bidder. The Globe could also sit for a long time without finding a buyer.

On top of it, what shrewd investor would want to buy a company whose union won't give an inch to help make it solvent again?

The union's hard-headedness is ill timed. They could be the reason another great newspaper becomes dust.

* A follow-up to the meeting of newspaper executives a couple of weeks ago, where it was hinted they were planning business models for charging for online content.

They Poynter Institute's Rick Edmonds notes that American Press Institute offered a second strategy that should also be considered -- going after Craigslist to regain classified revenues lost to the popular, free classified site.

While many claim it's too little, too late, there is some merit to the suggestion. While Craigslist is still highly popular and free, it is at a vulnerable state now which newspapers could use to leverage folks back to local brands (or a "unified national brand, as API put it).

In addition to the highly-publicized use of Craigslist by the sex trade, numerous smaller frauds and user issues have frustrated novice and casual users of the service. These are audiences that a solid local brand ... like a newspaper ... could take advantage of Craigslist's shortcomings and ethical issues to build a trusted, secure network to sell items online and in print.

It won't solve the industry's woes, but it could help flatten or reverse the revenue problems at local newspapers.

* As a journalist and a frequent Twitter user, I love this piece of advice from writer Ann Handley, "Everything I need to know about Twitter I learned in journalism school."
Great words of advice for any Twitter user!

2009-05-29T13:35:00.007-05:00

Will newspapers make an offer you can't refuse? Or will you?

The buzz has been thick over the hush-hush meeting of the nation's top newspaper publishers this week in suburban Chicago. Execs from chains from Gannett to McClatchy to MediaNews and Hearst are among the group meeting quietly to discuss future revenue models that hopefully will pull newspapers from the financial quagmire they've been mired in for the past several years.

The real buzz is that this may be a unified effort by newspaper companies to develop a strategy to charge for online content.

Former Tribune editor and reporter James Warren likens the confab to the famed 1950s meeting of the nation's Mafia chieftains. (It's ironic that this meeting is in Rosemont, whose former mayor had been accused of being a buddy to the Chicago mob during his 50-year tenure).

While such a comparison may be stretching things a bit, this "discreet discussion on business models" does show the potential of being an orchestrated effort by the industry to control pricing of content. And if that is the case, the argument is there that the news industry -- which has had a long history of fighting collusion and monopolization of enterprise -- is itself in violation of anti-trust measures. Slate's Ben Shaffer makes that argument here.

Whatever the outcome, we can only hope that it does not come down to a unified effort to local down content. As I've mentioned before, readers would be willing to pay a premium, but it needs to be on their terms.

I'm not sure our industry leaders understand that their audience is no longer a "mass" audience. People are turning away from newspapers because they can get their news and information "self-serve," through their own methods of filtering and through their 'micro-communities." Until these execs realize that and start refining current products and developing new products that are accepted into these microcommunities, readers -- and potential readers -- will look at online fees as simply a form of "protection money."

2009-05-28T12:14:00.011-05:00

'Soft parade' falling flat?

A couple of follow-ups:

*My item a couple of months ago about the upstart San Diego News Network held hope for an emerging revenue model for online media. Unfortunately, that apparently isn't happening, according to San Diego CityBeat. SDNN has cut back its stipends to bloggers and writers, as well as eliminated its freelance budget. A review by CityBeat shows that ad sales have not been too brisk, also.

As a result, a number of staff has left, leaving the bulk of the work to fall on the remaining area editors. And just how many San Diegians were coming to the site is also unclear.

The rule of thumb is that a new web venture needs about 18 months to build a sustainable readership, but in today's economic climate, it's harder for new ventures to ride that timeline if it cannot cover the costs and maintain staff morale during that time.

We can still be hopeful for SDNN. But it if doesn't make it, at least they tried. And that's more than you can say for many media businesses right now.

* Washington Post's Paul Fahri writes in the American Journalism Review about the Twitter explosion, and questions whether it's just the latest information plaything. I agree with his final assessment that it's what you make of it.

But keep in mind that in the 1980s -- when I worked at Radio Shack salesman selling the new TRS-80 home computer -- computers in the home was considered a play toy for the wealthy. Again, we told our new customers the potential of these devices were "what you made of it."

Thirty years later, home computers have changed the culture and the way we conduct our lives. Twitter may not be the answer, but it is playing a major role in the way people get and share information.

As a business, we need to respect that, and we need to modify or create a product or products that address that.

2009-05-19T20:16:00.018-05:00

Will I pay for news online? Only if I don't have another choice

I spent a day this week speaking about the future of news with a group of media and communication students at North Central College in Naperville. Amid the discussion I posed the question to the 20-something students: "Would you be willing to pay for online news?"

Their consensus was yes, but only if there is no other alternative.

This may be a welcome sign for newspaper publishers who are looking into closing the door on free content. Papers from Newsday to the Denver Post and, most recently, the Kankakee Daily Journal are planning to charge for content on their websites.

But -- as one of these college students pointed out -- readers may not pay for online content if it does not appeal to them. This students used the Tribune's Red Eye as an example of a newspaper/web site combo that he would be willing to pay for. Not so for the parent Chicago Tribune.

So if publishers are ready to start charging for online access, are their online products worth buying? If your newspaper's Web site is a mirror image of your print product, you'd better think twice before setting up the tollbooth.

Keep in mind web readership is vastly different that print. Brand loyalty that used to be a part of newspaper readership does not translate onto the web (credibility, yes; loyalty, no). If a potential reader isn't buying your print edition, what incentive does he have to buy into your web site?

What does your site offer that a current or new reader can't get from somewhere else? Is it targeted to a specific audience, or are you still running your site to appeal to a mass audience? What keeps your site relevant and useful to the reader? If you were an online reader, what would make you want to buy into your web site?

And, if I find something of value through an aggragator such as Google, will I be able to access it for a nominal fee (if not free?), or will I need to buy a
subscription into the site?

Finally, as an online subscriber, will I forced to sit through the annoying pop-up ads that I've had to endure when content was free? Will my subscription buy my way out of in-your-face advertising? Now there's a conundrum for publishers to ponder.

This is, of course, if readers do accept paid content. As we saw with the Denver Post poll, a large majority of Post readers don't believe the online version is valuable enough to purchase.

But it does come down to the basics. You have value in your product, which we must remember is news and information -- not paper and HTML code. How you package that and deliver it to your readers will constitute its value, and whether it a value they are willing to pay for.

*If my recent post about the values of Twitter wasn't enough to sway you, check out this episode of PBS's MediaShift, titled "Twitter Mania: Will Twitter Change the World?" I suspect it already has, and agree this will be more than a passing fan. Twitter may fade away in the future, but something else will sure replace it.

2009-05-14T13:31:00.006-05:00

Flotsam for today

* Has the industry really come down to this? A $13,000 auction bid on an internship? At the Huffington Post?

Granted, the auction is for a worthy cause and the money will not go directly into Post owner Arianna Huffington's pocket. But considering Huffington Post is built on the backs of people providing content at no cost (or at best, very little cost) to Ms. Huffington, this latest offering just helps to seal her image of the Marie Antoinette of journalism.

I just hope the winning bidder isn't expecting a return on his initial investment. Not from Ms. Huffington, at least.

* Another reason why publishers shouldn't jump on the paid-content wagon yet. Just after MediaNews Corp. announced it would create a paid-content system for its newspaper web sites, the flagship Denver Post asked readers if they would be willing to pay to get stories on the web. Media guru Steve Outing got a hold of the results. A whopping 83 percent of Denver readers said "no."

Now I'm sure MediaNews' readership in Denver is not that much different that those in California and elsewhere, so I hope that Dean Singleton and his minions carefully read what his readers are saying in the comments. Basically, they reinforce the notion that reader loyalty is no longer based on the product. The "I can get my news elsewhere for free" argument continues to come up, and this is very true.

If you want to force paid content onto readership, it will have to be done in a unified move by the entire industry. Everyone from the New York Times to the Podunk Bugle will have to lock down its content simultaneously. Even in this crisis, I don't see that type on unity developing.

Instead of locking down content, MediaNews (and everyone else) should be focusing on new, innovative products that would slice and dice the information into convenient, personalized packages. People may be willing to pay for that.

* I've been criticized for my immediate dissing of the Kindle DX and its potential for newspapers. I don't think the Kindle DX is a bad product. In fact, I think it serves a wonderful purpose, especially for high school and college students who can download several hundred pounds worth of textbooks into a viable and portable device. But for newspapers and magazines, the Kindle DX cannot replicate the newspaper experience. In fact, no electronic reader can replicate the newspaper experience.

That is why, to gain new readers, newspapers should be looking at a device that can provide the interactive experience of an iPhone (or at least a 2.0 website) in a viable and portable device. Here's a video I found on YouTube that comes close to my vision of the e-paper experience:

This is a nice start. But imagine adding interactivity. The ability to touch a story and get more information, like previous stories, links, or a comment window. Touch a photo and it turns into a video. Touch an ad and get more information on the product and the ability to buy it.

Now that's an experience you can't get from print!

2009-05-11T22:00:00.013-05:00

What I would tell journalism graduates

I spend a lot of time talking to high school and college classes about the future of the news industry. But given the current state of affairs, I wonder if the journalism's Class of 2009 is as confident to enter the this world as the rest of their fellow grads.

Unfortunately, I don't have the clout or a PhD to give commencement addresses at most universities. You won't see me at the podium of a prestigious journalism school this year, but if I were there, this is how I would advise the Class of '09:

Congratulations, graduates. You've achieved a tremendous milestone in your lives. After four or more years of developing the skills you need to become a bona fide journalist, you now stand ready to apply those talents into your livelihood.

But keep this in mind. Once you've packed up your diploma and worldly possessions and step beyond the campus limits, all entitlements you've enjoyed during the first quarter of your lives will cease to exist.

At that point, you are on your own.

And what you face seems insurmountable. As journalism graduates, you are entering an industry in crisis. Newspapers are cutting back significantly or folding. Television and radio, while not as highly publicized, face similar declines in viewership and revenue. The Internet offers promise, but the successful ventures so far tend to be those that get by on shoestring staffs and budgets.

As as you look for a job in your field, you won't be alone. You'll be competing with more than 9,000 journalists who have been laid off since January of this year. Add them to the 16,000 people out of work in 2008, and you see the line for existing jobs is very long. In fact, one out of every four journalism job that existed 20 years ago no longer exist. You're joining a growing group of people vying for fewer jobs.

Despite the gloomy forecast, I urge you to not give up.

We need you.

Despite appearances, the news industry is not heading towards extinction. It is undergoing an evolution. After the death of dinosaurs, the earth developed new life that grew and prospered. Likewise, from the death of the old media, a new, more exciting and prosperous media will emerge.

And we need you for that evolution.

For you see, the media is not dying because people don't want news. Contrary, news readership continues to grow. More people are tuned in to what is happening today than ever before. Traditional news sites like the New York Times and Washington Post have highly-trafficked Web sites. Sites like CNN and BreakingNews are among the most followed on Twitter.

What is changing is how people get their news. That is something the current media refused to acknowledge from the outset, and it is the reason we are in trouble today. People may not want to read a paper at the breakfast table anymore, but they still want to know what is happening in their town, their region, their world.

People will still read a good story. The difference is that we must now give it to them on their terms.

And that's where we need your help.

We need dedicated, passionate people who can tell a great story. But we need people who also understand their audience and what they want. You've grown up in a world that we older folk have trouble grasping, and you may see new, innovative ways of getting the story out that we are blinded to. Together, we can make the industry evolve into something that is relevant, vibrant and informative to readers.

So don't give up.

If you're lucky enough to land a job, congratulations. Put your best into it and be active in helping your company evolve. Be idealistic, but also be realistic. Don't be dismayed by the setbacks, but keep your vision and help us achieve it. Don't give up.

If you are still looking, continue to practice your craft however you can. Start a blog, network with friends, do freelance work in your spare time, do volunteer work. Continue to refine and hone your skills. Get a job to pay the bills, but don't give up.

If you have an idea that may help the industry, try to go out on your own with it. Great ideas don't always come out of board rooms. In fact, I'd be hard pressed to name one great idea that originated in a board room. If you are successful, you will be noticed. If you aren't, cut your losses and move on. Stay optimistic. Don't give up.

Above all, don't stop learning. Everything I learned in college became obsolete within 10 years. You'll be extremely lucky if everything you learned outlasts your college loan payments. You don't need to go back for a masters degree, but continue to read up on industry trends, take advantage of classes offered from community colleges to industry groups like the Poynter Institute. Expand your skills. Knowledge is gold. Continue to invest in it.

Yes, the headlines are bleak and the outlook is bleaker for the news industry. There is not much to hang hope on right now. But there is hope. We cannot allow the news industry to die, for to do so would endanger a key foundation from which our society was built on.

There is hope. And though you may not realize it now, you are a very big part of it.

Don't give up.

2009-05-04T14:25:00.011-05:00

Is this the future of newspapers? Maybe, maybe not...

A number of firms are looking at developing electronic devices to help do to the newspaper industry what the iPod did to help the music industry. Plastic Logic, News Corp. and Hearst have formed a partnership to develop an electronic reader similar to the popular Kindle, only in a larger size. The idea is to have reader that can replicate the size and feel of a newspaper so that paper elements, such as photos and advertisements, can be replicated. The cooperative effort is expected to begin sometime next year, according to the New York Times.

This week, Amazon, maker of the Kindle, announced it would create a similar device that would be on the market later this year. Like the Plastic Logic device, it would also be a larger format -- basically the size of an 8 1/2 x 11 sheet of paper --- and would also accommodate newspaper elements.

The idea is that once these devices are on the market, newspaper can sell their content in downloadable subscriptions to these consumers. Think of it, you can get your morning paper without stepping outside your front door.

Will this be the savior for the floundering industry? Not in this current thinking. While e-papers have the potential of creating a new reading experience for consumers, simply plopping a digital version of your ink-and-paper product won't be the answer. Look at your readers? They like what you're giving them now and -- based on your age demographics -- will probably be resistant to moving away from paper.

Now look at your non-readers. Why aren't they picking up- newspapers? It's not because they're adverse to ink-and-paper. It's what's on it. It's dated. It's stagnant. It gives them nothing new.

If e-papers are going to work and be profitable, they are going to have to be as dynamic and relevant as your Web site. Think video. Think audio. Think 24/7 updating.

Think 'Minority Report.'

In that movie, the copy of USA Today a commuter was reading on the subway changed its front page changed as he was reading it.

E-papers will need to be that, and more. They'll need to interactive. If I want to comment on a story, I should be able to do that by pressing a button on the story. I should be able to play the 911 call on a murder story, or watch the video of a soldier returning to my hometown. If I see an interesting ad, I should be able to touch and it will bring up that merchant's Web site. If I'm reading a movie review, I should be able to select a link that takes me to a listing of theaters where it's playing, along with times and even a link to Fandango or similar ticket-purchasing site. A restaurant review? How about giving me a link to its Web site, and a way to make online reservations.

If I can fold it and put it under my arm for easy carrying, that would also be great.

That will sell e-papers.

Such a product would not only be valuable to potential readers, but to potential advertisers as well. And isn't that what it's all about?

UPDATE: WEDNESDAY, MAY 6: Amazon chief Jeff Bezos unveils the larger Kindle DX. At $500 with a black and white screen and limited interactivity, the major use will probably be for college students, as the new, bigger Kindle will be able to handle the more complex -- and expensive -- college textbooks.

However, the DX in its current form will most likely make publisher lean to providing the formatted print version in an electronic form. Which is sad, because what will be learned is that people don't want the print version on an electronic sheet.

Reading a newspaper is more about getting information. It's a sensory experience of visual and tactile cues. That does not translate onto an electronic screen.

For newspapers, the DX is a fax machine in an iPhone world. The iPhone experience is quite different, combining visual and tactile cues to create instant gratification -- an item missing in the new Kindle. More will be needed from this product to create a reader experience that will make them "need" this format -- and be willing to pay a premium for it.

2009-04-30T12:14:00.011-05:00

Will newspapers ever figure it out?

This week's release of the ABC's FAS-FAX circulation figures shows newspapers continue to be in a crisis despite "new" initiatives to attract new readers. Aggregate circulation fell by 7 percent this spring, compared to 5 percent during the same period last year.

The numbers say two things:

1. New initiatives introduced last year are not working. That isn't a surprise, because most of the initiatives aren't "new," but retreads on old ideas. For example, the Tribune Company launched major redesigns of the Chicago Tribune and Orlando Sentinel in an attempt to be more "web" like. The results, according to FAS-FAX, has been a 7.5 percent loss in readers for the Tribune and a whopping 9.4 percent loss in circulation for the Sentinel. With a redesign, you expect to alienate older readers with change, and some will drop their subscriptions. But what we're seeing is that the new look is not attracting new readers to offset that loss. You can put lipstick on a pig, but...

2. Newspapers still haven't figured out what their readers want. In Denver, the Post had expected to pick up readers of the Rocky Mountain News when that paper folded a couple of months back. The FAS-FAX figures show that at least 75,000 former RMN readers are not picking up the Post. In the 90s, publishers assumed young readers would begin reading newspapers when they settle down. In the early part of the new millennium, publishers assumed people would still be loyal to newspapers even through the Internet was making inroads as a provider of information and communications. We all remember what our parents said if we assume anything...

The results continue to show a lack of foresight by the industry. In my post last year about the Media 2.0 organization, I couldn't stress enough the need for a research and development department. A team that is analyzing readers' wants and needs, developing changes and new products to meet them, and keeping an eye on the changing technology and how they can use it to a build and maintain revenues and readership. I have yet to see a major newspaper make that kind of commitment.

In the meantime, however, maybe the publishers should look at the few papers out there that actually saw an increase in circulation. If they are not willing to invest in their own future, maybe they can find out and copy what's working for these few. After all, imitation is the sincerest form of flattery, and it might be enough to stabilize a company to actually start thinking about the future.

2009-04-22T13:17:00.008-05:00

Flotsam for today

* Update on my "soft parade" item last month: In Seattle, readership of the new web-only seattlepi.com dropped by more than 30% in March, in essence dropping the website from the coveted Top 30 listing by Editor and Publisher. While some are reading it as an indicator that print readership drives online, it should also be noted that seattlepi underwent a significant transition in its content, focusing more on community journalism and bloggers to provide the news. While it's still way too early to make judgements, the drop may be more on the readers' reaction to that change than any print/online link.

UPDATE, 1:46 P.M. THURSDAY, APRIL 23: A rocky start for the new venture by former Rocky Mountain News staffers as well. InDenverTimes, created to keep "The Rocky spirit in Denver" has parted company with the investors who had planned to support the site with the help of 50,000 paid subscribers. While no subscriber figures have been announced yet, it sounds as if the group would not make that goal by the May 4 deadline they had set.

* A brutal week in Chicago. The Chicago Tribune today announced it is laying off 50 newsroom members in an effort to 'rightsize' the company and get it out of bankruptcy. This comes a day after the crosstown rival Sun-Times announced it was eliminating 140 non-union positions throughout the company's city and suburban properties. You have to wonder at what point do staff cuts surpass "fat trimming" and become a limbo contest of "how low can you go?"

UPDATE, 1:53 P.M. THURSDAY, APRIL 23: The Chicago Reader's Mike Miner has a partial list of those let go. A number are friends who used to work at my company. But a lot of talent and experience has been bled in this last reduction. It will be interesting to see how the scope of Tribune coverage -- especially in high school sports, a staple in the Chicago area and one dominated by the suburban papers -- is affected.

* My Palm IIIc, which has served me faithfully as my life organizer for the past 9 years, breathed its last gasp of battery power last week and died a peaceful death. While researching a replacement, a friend forwarded me this Luddite-studded (though I wonder if using a Palm IIIc in 2009 could qualify me as a Luddite) pitch on 10 reasons why paper is still the best productivity platform. Michael Scott would be proud.

And can someone tell me where I can buy a Hipster PDA

2009-04-19T15:06:00.017-05:00

Twitter and news: The start of a beautiful relationship

Is Twitter part of your media strategy? If you're a news organization, it better be. You're already missing the boat if you haven't even started thinking about it.

Twitter -- the 'microblogging' service that has exploded in popularity over the past year -- has not only become one of the most popular forms of social communication, it has also developed into an incredible news delivery service. We're seeing more and more breaking news stories finding it's first mention on Twitter. From the terrorist attacks in Mumbai to the plane that made an emergency landing in the Hudson River, Twitter has played a role in first alerts.

But Twitter can more than a breaking news outlet. The very heart of Twitter lies on the development of "micro communities" that interact and communicate with each other. For a newspaper or news organization, these communities are readers and potential readers that can be attracted to you through this platform. These audiences can be brought to view and, in essence, become new readers to your products.

The key is to use Twitter for what it was meant to do -- create a continuing dialog with your communities.

The beauty of Twitter is that its operation is very low-maintenance. Set up is simple. There are a number of off-the-shelf apps that can suit your purposes well. I prefer using Tweetdeck, a free third-party app that does the best job in organizing and categorizing your incoming tweets. Plus, the newest update allows you to send your tweets to your Facebook page as well. (Facebook is another social networking site you should be on as well. But we'll get to that later.)

You can have one person utilize your Twitter feed, or you can have your entire newsroom involved. Again, training is simple.

Many newspapers have already set up an RSS feed designed to send headlines out to their followers. This is fine, because part of strategy in Twitter is to tout what you have to offer. But a big drawback to RSS is that is a one-way street on a system designed to be 2-way.

The essence of Twitter is conversation. You bring thoughts, ideas and suggestions to the table. Your followers add their comments and bring their thoughts. It's like a continuing water cooler discussion. People who will follow one another in these micro communities trust the information being passed along, and will trust recommendations and suggestions that are brought into the conversation as well. Your value to the Twitter world is dependent on what you provide in the discussion.

An RSS feed is a terrible discussion partner. To really develop Twitter into a valuable asset, you need a personal touch that not only can get your followers' attention, but interact with them as well.

To make your Twitter service really shine, it must:

1. Have personality: RSS feeds can't make a follower laugh, scratch his head, or attract him into discussion. That's why it's important to have someone manually sending out tweets and create a Twitter 'persona,' such as the Chicago Tribune's Coloneltribune or the suburban Chicago Daily Herald's DHInsider. Nuance, tone and humor mean a lot in Twitterland. For example, here’s a story that was recently tweeted out by the Daily Herald:

RSS Feed: "Are there cougars in DuPage County?"
DHInsider:"Officials say cougars are in DuPage Co. The large nocturnal cats, that is, not the ... well, you know"

Both tweets contained a link to the story. But The DHInsider item was retweeted (Twitterspeak for forwarding a message) several times by its followers. That means your followers are sending this to their followers, who may send it to their followers. And that third-plus level of followers who were unaware of you may find it worth their while to follow you directly. That, in essence, is building your audience.

2. Remember the conversation. Once you've established a Twitter persona, follow the people who follow you. That gives them the idea you're interested in them (which, of course, you are). It widens the forum for you. As your audience widens, you can bring them into discussion forums that you can use for your news operation. For example, Twitter polls are easy. So are gauging reader opinion. Utilizing hashtags to create discussion topics can give you content that can be culled for stories or future products.

If a follower replies or direct messages you, be sure to respond. You don't have to keep the conversation going, but be sure to make them know you value their opinion and following.

3. Go beyond headlines. The only thing RSS feeds are good for is sending out headlines and story links. But your site offers far more than that. If you have a great blogger, multimedia feature, video, etc., link to it from your Twitter persona. Don't be afraid to occasionally retweet it. The lifetime for an average tweet is about 5 minutes, and you never know when your followers are watching you. So banging your drums a few times a day doesn't hurt ... but don't overdo it. The last thing you want is for your followers to think you're spamming them.

Your Twitter persona is also a great avenue to build up credibility among followers, especially during times of breaking news. You have the resources to verify information, so as the Twittersphere explodes with information on a breaking news event, use your persona to provide details and clarify misinformation. Here's an excellent example from the Austin American-Statesman. The more credibility you can build, the more your followers will trust you.

4. Be consistent. Not everyone following you is on a 9-5 schedule. So be certain your Twitter persona is operating throughout the day and night. That'll probably mean more than one person manning the feed. But the news business is 24/7, and if your Twitter persona is a newshound, your followers will expect it to be on duty all the time.

5. It's not all about you: Don't be shy to retweet, even if it's from a competitor. Did a follower send out information that would be interesting to your community? Let them know. In today's world, readers do not care as much about the source of the information as about the information itself. If you can become reliable enough to provide your readers with what they want, they'll tend to stick with you. That means being sure to follow your local information sources. Most professional sports teams, for example, have Twitter feeds. Many business and commerce organizations are setting up on Twitter. Governments are catching on, too. If a team's star player suffers an injury and the team's announces it on Twitter, it's faster to retweet that than wait for your reporter to dig up that info. Faster, cheaper, and still serving your followers.

Bottom line: The more you engage your followers, the more they'll stick with you. The more information from you that is retweeted by others, the larger your sphere of followers will become. Be relevant, personable, and have a bit of fun. Your readership will grow faster than you can imagine. That that becomes a potential gold mine for readership in other products you offer, including your Web site and newspaper.

Too many news organizations and newspapers are so focused on building revenue that they seemed to have lost track of rebuilding readership and cultivating new readers. Twitter won't build immediate revenues, but it is a low-cost, low-maintenance way of creating audiences that can be attracted to your existing and new products.

You can't make money if you don't have an audience, right?

2009-04-14T14:05:00.016-05:00

Writing to young readers: Are Boomers too retro?

Ralph Keyes brings up an interesting point: Are younger readers not picking up newspapers because we're being too 'retro' in our writing?

When journalists refer to people as being too 'Eddie Haskell,' for example, do those folks born well after the 1950s know, first of all, who Eddie Haskell is and, secondly, why someone would compare Treasury Secretary Tim Geithner to him?

While those of us in the Boomer generation would fully understand the analogy, I can appreciate why the Gen Ys and millennials would scratch their heads and go 'huh?'

Just how sensitive is it? A few years back, I was training a young and talented assistant editor to become a department manager. Part of that training included giving her the lead in a major project that involved a number of content editors. For the first week, I continually received phone calls and e-mails about the project from the content editors.

After days of forwarding the questions to the assistant, I finally shot out an e-mail to the content editors reminding them that she was in charge of the project and that I should be looked at as 'the Sgt. Schultz of this project."

About a half-hour later, the assistant sheepishly asked me "Who is Sgt. Schultz?"

I laughed --- I probably shouldn't have --- and explained he was the affable and bumbling Nazi guard of "Hogan's Heroes" whose famous line was "I know nothing, NOTH-THING!!!!"

But later it made me aware that such analogies worked for me and my peers, but not for this young assistant and the staff she was managing.

Like a manager and his staff, writers need to also understand the factors that have influenced their readers. In many cases, the two may not be in sync.

This is the very reason the staff at Beloit College puts together a yearly "mindset" list....what the incoming freshman class may or may not know. It gives the staff ... and those of us who read it ... the perspective of the 18-year-old student as he sees the world. Check out the current version. Eddie Haskell isn't on it. Neither is Sgt. Schultz.

As a writer, you must know the audience you're writing to. And you must write to them in terms they'll understand.

Being too retro for younger readers may not be the main reason they don't pick up newspapers. But if may be a factor as to why they don't understand what you're writing about. Maybe we Boomers should consider locking Eddie Haskell and Sgt. Schultz in that time vault, and find newer analogies to state our case.

It may not be too bad every now and then to say the cost of President Obama's stimulus package is bigger than Kanye West's ego.

2009-04-10T13:45:00.006-05:00

Who says journalism is dying?

The conundrum for today:

More than 8,000 journalists have lost their jobs this year.

15,000 lost jobs last year.

Since 1990, 1 in 4 journalism jobs in the country have been eliminated.

Two major newspapers have closed this year, and more may close by year's end.

Forbes magazine listed journalism as one of the 10 worst professions in the new millennium.

So why are journalism schools seeing an increase in enrollments?

Could it be because these students still believe in the value of news? Could it be because they feel it is a profession where they can (individually or as a team) make a difference in someone's life? Could it be because they have a passion for the craft of great storytelling?

Whatever the reason, it shows that there is still hope for the profession, and that hope may eventually save the industry.

2009-04-09T12:23:00.012-05:00

They blew it, but the fight's not over

Media guru Jeff Jarvis, in his Buzzmachine blog, published the speech he would've given to the annual NAA conference in San Diego this week. In his speech, he would've told the nation's newspaper publishers "You blew it."

Jarvis chastises the publishers for neglecting the changing tide of readership, for not embracing technology fast enough, for letting Google, Craigslist and other aggregators to get the better of them, and for letting Associated Press continue to ruin their chances for survival. (In a later post, he calls for the elimination of AP to give newspapers rightful control over its local content).

As a result, Jarvis says, publishers are angry. But the readers should be angry at them for "the poor stewardship you have exercised over the press and its service to society."

Strong words, and much of it rings true. But one thing Jarvis didn't offer was a way out. In essence, his speech is saying "stick a fork in it ... it's done." It makes me wonder if Jarvis needs to walk away and calm down a bit. Tim McGuire of the Cronkite School of Journalism has the same feelings.

The majority of publishers attending NAA realize they blew it (though some may still be in denial). And many are trying to figure out ways to bring back readership and revenue. Yes, charging for content is a bad idea now ... but give them credit for at least trying to come up with something.

And, yes, the industry needs new innovators and idea men in positions of power. People who are willing to take chances. Sam Zell and his crew may not be the consummate news moguls, but at least the Tribune Co. is trying new and different approaches to content and delivery that many others are afraid to touch.

The newspaper industry is ailing, but by no means done. As long as news readership remains strong ... which it does ... providing relevant, quality content will remain a viable business.

The trick is to find a way to profit. And America has always found a way to do that.

* Building newspaper readership? Maybe the NAA should take a closer look at India, where newspapers are thriving right now.

It's interesting that in India, where illiteracy is a problem, the goal is "to aspire to read a newspaper." As I said before, the Newspaper in Education program missed its mark by being merely a circulation tool instead of a grassroots education program to teach school children to become newspaper readers.

Illiteracy may not be as big a problem here as in India, but newspaper illiteracy sure is. If newspapers can survive this generation, there's still time to build on the next.

2009-04-03T23:35:00.005-05:00

Death watch, continued...

Looks like we can add Boston to the growing list of major cities in danger of becoming one-newspaper towns. It was disclosed that the New York Times Co., which owns the Boston Globe, has threatened to close the paper unless its unions make major concessions.

Granted, times are tough in the industry and management and unions needs to find common ground in order to survive. But it would be an absolute waste of a great institution to see the Globe ... the No. 1 paper in the market, no less ... shuttered over a union/management issue.

2009-04-01T20:33:00.004-05:00

Best. April. Fools. story. ever.

The Guardian newspaper of Great Britain published one of the best April Fool's stories I've ever read. The paper "announced" that it would cease publication of the 188-year-old paper, and instead provide news entirely on Twitter.

In addition, it would also Twitterize it's entire news archives.

Too funny, yet in a way a bit frightening to those of us too close to the issues facing newspapers today.

Here's the link. It's a great laugh.

2009-03-30T11:48:00.011-05:00

San Diego joins the 'soft parade' revolution

Is San Diego the latest market to join the "soft parade" revolution?

A new venture called San Diego News Network recently launched in the California city. On first blush, the site seems to reflect hyperlocal sites that have been started ... and for some, failed ... in other markets.

With a staff of about 25, SDNN's approach is to utilize a combination of local news sites, citizen journalists and bloggers to provide the basis of news and information for local residents, as well as maintaining "a conversation with San Diego" through online forums.

So what makes SDNN different? It's a unique partnership with local media outlets, from television stations to niche publications, that share ad revenue from the site, according to Interim Executive Editor Barbara Bry.

"They understand that by banding together we all win — particularly San Diegans who will have a terrific news and information resource. In exchange for a share of SDNN ad revenues, the media partners provide us with free advertising," Bry said in an e-mail.

In addition to this partnership, SDNN also has an agreement with AP provide national and world news.

Bry would not go into specifics on the revenue sharing - nor would she discuss specific one- and five-year revenue goals - but did note that SDNN did sell out its total advertising spots for its launch.

CEO Neil Senturia adds the SDNN revenue model is different from traditional news sites.

"SDNN is structured with a much lower operational costs in terms of delivery of services and staffing with an unmatched capability to provide more personalized, hyper local news and information for readers where they live, work and play," Senturia recently said to Chief Marketer. "Additionally, SDNN will have greater opportunities for advertisers to target specific local audiences based on demographic and psychographic information with pinpoint accuracy than other media outlets."

Senturia calls it a local version of what Google does on a national and international level.

Senturia and Bry -- a one-time reporter for the L.A. Times and Sacramento Bee -- don't hide the fact that SDNN is out to compete directly with the Union-Tribune's SignOnSanDiego site.

“Our goal is to become the dominant homepage for San Diegans looking for news, information and meaningful conversation on a wide range of topics pertaining to the areas where they live, work and play,” Senturia said in a press release.

So, yes, San Diego will be another community to watch this year. Given its unique partnership with a host of local media, SDNN is getting it right in my mantra "do what you do best, and link to the rest."

And if its Google-lite approach to generating revenue is successful, SDNN could be a model for other media sites, particularly those in competitive markets.

Here's lookin' at you, San Diego!

2009-03-27T10:53:00.006-05:00

Death watch, continued...

It's been a tough week for the newspaper industry. More staff cuts, salary cuts, furloughs, and announcements for more newspaper closings throughout the country have cast anew a shadow on those in the business.

According to the Paper Cuts blog, there are more than 6,600 positions eliminated since the first of the year. That a lot of journalists looking for work, and I'm sure there are many more who are still employed looking to get out as well.

But as we in the industry lick our wounds, we should also be thinking about those who are looking for work. Most have families and mortgages. All have financial commitments they must meet. But they are all our friends and colleagues.

I mention the Poynter Institute's Jill Geisler's "10 reasons to hire a journalist" essay last week. While that was directed more towards future employers, we can also offer a hand to help our friends find new work.

We are journalists. Part of our work involves meeting people outside our immediate sphere of influence. We talk to civic leaders. We talk to businessmen, We talk to people who have the power to hire. If we've done our job well, we've developed professional relationships with these people.

Use that network to help someone find a new job. Ask around for who's hiring. Ask if they know anyone who's hiring. If you find a link, refer an out-of-work colleague to them.

If every one of us who is still employed found one person a new job, that would easily bring down that 6,000+ figure. But most of all, it'll reaffirm to those who left the business that journalism is just a career -- it's a brethren who continue to look out for each other.

*An interesting piece on how large, process driven companies can be taught to be innovative. The example cited in this essay is Proctor & Gamble, but does your news org fit the "process driven" mold? And is the culture ready for innovation?

I can hear your heads shaking from here.

2009-03-20T14:03:00.007-05:00

Why a journalist would be a great addition to your business

The Poynter Institute's Jill Geisler recently wrote a heartfelt and impassioned plea to employers out there, giving them 10 reasons to hire a journalist.

I can't add to Geisler's excellent list, only to say: How many employees do you have who have had to deal with stench of death while doing their job? Or have had to talk to grieving family members? Or have had to think on their feet to find ways to circumvent roadblocks to attain information? Or spend hours poring over mountains of mundane documents to find the nugget that links something thought to be unlinkable?

These life experiences are what make journalists an excellent employee in just about any field. They've dealt with the underside of life -- the best, and the worst of people.

They'll certainly be able to handle whatever your organization can dish out.

* WOOT! My blog item on newspapers going digital was quoted in this week's Pew Research Center's blog trends report. Read it here (although you'll need to read down a bit!)

2009-03-19T12:40:00.007-05:00

The new 'soft parade' revolution

Is the "soft parade" revolution finally starting in the newspaper industry?

Consider the following:

* New York Newsday announces it will create a pay-for-content system for its Web site, charging online readers for "packages" of news and features.

* The Seattle Post-Intelligencer prints its last edition this week. Instead, it will continue to cover Seattle online, in a product that will provide free content based on blogging, reader submissions and links to other sources.

* Staffers of the shuttered Rocky Mountain News gain financial backing and announce they will start an online venture IF they can get 50,000 Denver-area readers to subscribe for $4.99 a month.

Three new business models have emerged in the past month (two rising from the ashes of the failure of the previous one). Three petri dishes brewing in major markets.

We in the industry be watching these sites closely to see just how much they are accepted by their respective communities, as well as if they will deliver enough revenue to keep them afloat. We'll also see if the executives on these sites give their plans enough time to catch on, as well as how well they market it.

But, if any one of these tests become successful, you can be sure there will be a mad rush to copy that revenue model throughout the country.

It's sad that these test sites are finally launched as the result of a crisis. But when you think about it, that seems to be when journalists are at their best.

A footnote: NewWest blogger Jonathon Weber offers up his simple revenue model that he says works for him.

2009-03-16T11:32:00.009-05:00

From the ashes of one, will another arise?

Great journalism will never die. Great journalists won't let it.

Case in point: weeks after the demise of the Rocky Mountain News, a group of RMN staffers have gone on their own to keep the spirit of the Rocky alive. They are creating an online news source called InDenverTimes.com (The RMN name is still tied up in corporate limbo). With an introduction video (below) and highlights on the newly-created website, these folks are planning to reprise their coverage of the Denver area through a subscription-based model. A press conference is planned for later today, and I will update with info as it's released.

Although I have concerns that the subscription plan will not be enough to keep the venture afloat, I admire the tenacity and dedication to Denver they are showing here. Moreover, I really admire their dedication to the craft of great journalism.

There is a lot more of this spirit in newsrooms across America. Wouldn't it be great if their leaders recognized this and allowed it to flourish?

UPDATE, TUESDAY, MARCH 17: According to a Monday press conference, the RMN staffers starting up the InDenverTimes.com site have some financial backing from three Denver businessmen. One says he was the one of the reasons for the demise of the Rocky -- he cancelled his subscription years ago because he was getting the Rocky's news online.

But, he's offering the challenge to Denver to try to get 50,000 online subscribers by April 23 -- which would have been the 150th anniversary for the Rocky. If they achieve that goal, InDenverTimes.com will go live.

This is an exciting movement. Much has been said about the loyalty Denver readers had to the Rocky. Will they have the same loyalty to its soul in a reincarnated form?

We can only hope so.

2009-03-15T13:22:00.005-05:00

Death watch in Seattle

AP has an interesting story about Seattle facing the possibility of losing both its major daily newspapers. Read it here.

The Post-Intelligencer is considering going from print to online only, while the fate of the Seattle Times is uncertain. And although the P-I would retain an online presence, it would do so at a mere fraction of the labor it used to run the print operations. While noble in idea, the cutbacks may be a bit extreme to make the online P-I a viable voice for the community.

Losing a print edition to digital is not necessarily a bad thing. A community losing its voice, however, is.

UPDATE: TUESDAY, MARCH 17: Hearst made it official Monday. The P-I's last edition is March 18. Afterwords, the P-I will be an online-only product.

While the move on face value isn't as tragic as it may seem, there is a lot of worry just how the onlune P-I will continue to be the voice it was in print form. Only about 20 or so editorial employees are being retained for the new online venture. While they are focusing on the new mantra "Do what you do best, and link to the rest," can 20 employees be enough to effectively cover a major metropolitan area?

We'll see once the new seattlepi.com is unveiled.

2009-03-11T12:05:00.005-05:00

I blog, therefore I'm authoritative? Not!

Interesting piece from Techcrunch asking is social media like Twitter is causing blogs to lose their authority.

My question is: Do blogs REALLY have any authority to begin with?

Yes, I blog. And I like to think what I write about carries some weight with someone out there. But fact of the matter is that blogs have hit such a saturation point that readers can no longer differentiate between what is credible and what is purely BS.

In other words, blogs have become the CB radio of the new millennium. Everybody does one, but only a few do it right, or do it well.

In order to be authoritative, you must have your readers' trust. In order to gain that, you must have credibility. Without credibility, you have nothing.

There are many good, credible bloggers out there whose voices are being lost in the maddening crowd of pulpit bangers who feel freedom of speech means saying what you want without thinking, without evidence, without research.

This is why mainstream media has a large following in the online world. CNN, New York Times, Washington Post, BBC all have brands that have been established, and readers migrate to those sites online because they trust the brands.

Bloggers can become authoritative, but it won't happen until there is a thinning of the herd, which should allow the good ones who persevere through the mess to gain more credibility and readership.

Until then, it's a stretch to consider blogging as "authoritative."

2009-03-09T11:42:00.011-05:00

A tale of two directions in news

With apologies to Dickens, it is the worst of times, it is the best of times for newspapers.

In the worst of times, here is a list of 10 newspapers that experts predict could close or go all digital by the end of the year. It's a formidable list with some great journalistic institutions on it: The Miami Herald, San Francisco Chronicle, Chicago Sun-Times, Cleveland Plain Dealer. All are great newspapers serving major metropolitan regions, and it would be a shame to hear the bell toll for them just as it did for the Rocky Mountain News just last month.

Many of these nameplates are the smaller paper in two-paper markets. Many argue that the loss of these newspapers would silence a voice that spoke in difference to the other paper in the market. That may have held true in the press baron days, but with virtually all major newspapers owned by corporate interests, that is no longer the case. Even the Chicago Tribune broke it's hard-lined Republican stand last year. So what we may be witnessing is more of a corporate Darwinism in these big markets.

But what's important to note is that while the passing of a nameplate like the Rocky is tragic, is it just as tragic if these nameplates were to lose the print product and go all-digital?

Certainly not! It is not a death, but a metamorphosis. As long as the journalistic integrity and quality of content remains, these new all-digital news sites will not only survive, but hold a much better chance of building new audiences and, following traditional revenue theory, advertisers who believe more eyes on the site will translate into more traffic. Plus you don't have the overhead costs of the presses, ink, paper, trucks, etc.

I hope all 10 follow the all-digital route. Yes, it will be sad if a newspaper ceases to print, but its voice will live on in newer, more dynamic fashions. And as readers, we will follow.

The best of times: Here's a interesting piece of online experiments that could help newspaper companies realize some cash. I've been most impressed with the work being done at the Bakersfield Californian since the days of their Northwest Voice community journalism project. The Baktopia project mentioned in the article aims at getting and developing new readers. By building the brand and links, it'll be interesting to see if Bakersfield can keep these readers as they mature and look for new news and information products (much in the way automakers used to try to build loyalty by offering entry-level, mid-priced and luxury models to fit the needs of people as they enter new phases of their lives.)

The irony in this article is that many of the innovative experiments are being done by smaller, independent papers. Unfortunately, the bigger papers -- including some of the 10 on the above list -- seem too busy waiting for someone else to find the magic potion that will make them profitable again.

And that's why I see small, local newspapers as the ones with the greatest chance for survival through this evolution.

* Nice to see Jerry Roberts at the Santa Barbara Independent News saying what a bunch of us have been saying for years:

1. The focus is news, not paper
2. Own the local news, own the market

Now if only news execs would start LISTENING!

2009-03-06T12:08:00.011-06:00

The small shall inherit?

This TV news item caught my eye not because it's a great piece of journalism, but it highlights an issue that the newspaper crisis isn't only affecting the major metro markets. The thousands of small community newspapers are suffering as well. Many of them are suffering without the types of resources that a Tribune Co., E.W. Scripps or MediaNews may still have.

But what really impressed me was the spirit of the Williamson Daily News' publisher, who despite a 50% decrease in circulation over the decade continues to stress that his organization provides the news that can't be found through Google, the New York Times or CNN. (Keep in mind that a 50% circulation loss for Williamson would be a minor blip for the NY Times or USA Today)

And he's right. If anyone has a chance to survive the crisis, it's the community newspapers. Although advertising is affected by economic terms, the papers in these small communities will likely not be affected by Craigslist (though they should prepare for battle in the likelihood Craigslist or another service launches an uberlocal product) or other revenue zappers that have hit the metros hard.

The town hall meetings and high school football games are still important to the readers in these markets, and as long as the newspapers can provide this sort of information, they will survive.

This doesn't mean that community newspaper publishers can just sit back and weather out the storm. They still need to focus on developing new products to meet the changing reading habits of the audience. This means developign out their websites as well as alternative delivery methods. After all, there is still the threat of indpendent community journalism sites setting up in their turf.

But local is the future for news organizations, especially newspapers. You can see that now as the once "regional" papers like the Chicago Tribune and Dallas Morning News refocus themselves to the cities they are based in.

In the new world, the news organization that captures the local market on all delivery platforms will rule.

2009-03-02T10:11:00.006-06:00

More reasons the Rocky's path was too rocky

A follow-up to Friday's piece on the Rocky Mountain News. Blog reader Jay made two very interesting points about the RMN's final edition video:

1. Most of the people talking in the video are over 40 - It is clear that newspapers are only relevant to an older generation.

2. I spend many hours of my life in the daily news meetings that I saw again on this video. What struck me is that only 1 person in that room brought a laptop to the meeting. The rest of the group was still clinging onto paper budgets..that were probably hours out of date. News is now in real time and to survive some honored journalism rituals need to be questioned and changed.

I have personal experience with Jay's second comment. When I first moved to online, I brought a laptop to all news budget meetings as well, mainly to take notes and check online competitors for instant feedback. I was still fighting the "web scooping print" mindset at the time and the other editors saw the "real-time" news updates as a toy rather than a strategic planning tool. One top level editor even continually chastised me for spending too much time "surfing the web" during these meetings. There seemed to be little concern that a story they would talk about for publication later in the day was already on the Web site of their main competitors.

I hear not much has changed since those days, except they talk more about the web site now and a few more editors have become attuned to the news in "real-time" concept.

And, like Jay, I did notice there were way too few young people lamenting the fact that "My Rocky" won't be around for them. Again, it's a visual note that the RMN was not reaching the readers it needed to grab to stay afloat, let alone thrive.

Too many newsrooms still talk the talk, and very few walk the walk. I don't know if this was the case at RMN, but it seems that way too many newsrooms are still in denial over the fact that readership has shifted away from print.

The flagship newspaper served its purpose during its time, but those days are over. It's time to modify, retire or replace those flagships.

2009-02-27T22:37:00.004-06:00

As expected, the Rocky Mountain News closed its 149-year run with its head held high and nothing to be ashamed of. A powerful paper delivers one last time.

Included in the last web update is this video, a wonderful piece (although not totally unbiased) that captured the essence of the paper.

That's the press, baby. The press.

Final Edition from Matthew Roberts on Vimeo.

2009-02-26T20:15:00.009-06:00

Remember when you were a kid? There you were, with a bunch of your friends, standing in front of an old abandoned house. The one you thought was haunted? And everyone said they wanted to go in, but nobody wanted to go first? And, after several "I dare yous" and "we'll be right behind yous" you finally gather enough gumption to go in. So you take a deep breath, walk in and, in a moment of absolute fear, turn around to look at your friends, only to find they're still outside?

Well, Newsday is taking the "triple-dog dare" of the pay-for-content debate by announcing they plan to begin charging for its news content on the web site. In essence, it's going to go to its parent company's cable television roots to develop an on-demand paid news site. With Newsday taking the step forward, we're finally going to see if people are indeed willing to pay for news content on the web.

Or will we? Newsday's gamble is grand, but can one newspaper in a highly competitive market pull this off? Will the New York Times and Daily News ... as well as the other suburban and community news sites ... follow Newsday into the unknown, or will they sit outside and reap the benefits of Newsday readers deciding to get their news from somewhere else?

I give Newsday credit for trying to do something. But the plan still underestimates the loyalty of readers ... or, as we may likely see, the lack of loyalty. As long as they can get content from SOMEWHERE for free, they will likely gravitate towards that.

Again, instead of forcing charges on readers, why not give them products (packaging and distribution of your content) that they would be willing to pay for?

* My heart goes out to the editorial employees of the Rocky Mountain News, which ceased publication Friday. Ironically, word of the newspaper's demise was first broadcast through Twitter before it was picked up by the mainstreet media.

And, again through Twitter, we were able to see the thoughts and emotions of the newsroom as they produced the final edition. I noticed that the story played closely to the plot of the movie "Deadline U.S.A." -- a movie made more than 50 years ago.

Both examples say loads about the dynamic shift in information dissemination. If only newspaper owners would take notice.

2009-02-24T13:17:00.007-06:00

Chi-Town Daily News editor Geoff Dougherty created a small uproar this week by throwing down the gauntlet to the Chicago metro print media by saying that, for $2 million, he could build a newsroom that could provide equal, if not better, coverage of Chicago than the Tribune or Sun-Times.

His cost breakdown is here. Granted, the figures seem to be based on the assumptions that no one will read the Chi-Town Daily News for sports or features, and the regional average salary he uses will attract the type of talent you may find at the mainstream metros. But it is a challenge worth noting.

Dougherty notes his plan doesn't include an "advice columnist, a suburban bureau, an auto writer, or a fashion critic" which the metros have on their payrolls. I should add it doesn't include any columnists, like a John Kass or Mary Mitchell. Folks that can give personality and perspective to the news.

Yes, columnists drive the payroll up, much in the way a star athlete skews up the team's payroll. But yet they both serve a purpose, to do their job extremely well and become a face of the franchise.

If the Trib and Sun-Times did unload their high-priced talent, then, yes, they could probably be much closer to Dougherty's $2 million cap. Would they be any better? Probably not.

Dougherty's plan would work for his franchise. It's built itself a good base, and a $2 million infusion would certainly help it accomplish its mission. The metros, however, carry a broader mission and rely in its talent to draw in readers. I still believe readers come to the Tribune to read the likes of Kass, Zorn, Schmich, etc. Readers still like personality, attitude, authority that these folks provide.

And unfortunately, $2 million doesn't buy as much of that as it used to.

* Speaking of personality, Eric Zorn offers an alternative to the paid/free content dilemma facing news organizations. His proposal is to use the cable TV model, that is, paying for a "bundle" of news sites. The more you pay, the more sites you can get.

I like this plan because it gets into three of the basic tenets of my new world plan last year:

1. Content is the core product, but not the revenue maker. It's the way its packaged and delivered to the customer that makes money.
2. As a news site, you will need to rely on your competition to help you survive.
3. Readers don't care who produced the content. They want it given to them on their terms, and whoever does that best will earn their trust.

Zorn's bundling proposal is probably one of the more logical plans presented so far. But can it work in a climate where competing publishers are still so protective of their products that they're afraid or unwilling to share? That is the wall the needs to be broken and new alliances created before any move can be made to a truly innovative and potentially profitable venture.

Until we can get more forward-thinking people in positions of power in the industry, I'm afraid guys like Zorn and me are going to think about finding a second job.

2009-02-20T13:33:00.004-06:00

Flotsam for today:

* Gotta love it when media experts smack-talk each other. Newsosaur Alan Mutter smacks online guru Jeff Jarvis' assertion that content should be free by asking why his new book is selling for $26.99?

Cute, to be sure. But keep in mind that Jarvis is not selling his content. You can get a lot of what he says for free on his Buzzmachine blog any day. He's packaged this particular content into a product that is convenient and is targeted to a specific audience. Those customers are willing to pay $26.99 for the product.

The product happens to be a book and the business model has been around as long as Gutenberg.

Hey, isn't that a business model that newspapers can embrace?

* One unfortunate uptick for newspapers in these uncertain economic times is an increase in legal advertising -- in particular, foreclosure notices. Just look at any newspaper and you can see pages upon pages of foreclosure notices ... in many cases more so than classified advertising.

Surely, this will not bring newspapers back into profitability. But it's got to be helping to stem the bleeding a bit.

More importantly, this is one area that Craigslist hasn't been able to corner yet.

* You've probably noticed I've changed the name of this blog. No pressure from outside. Instead, the wife was concerned it made too much fun of how my name is pronounced (it takes cues from its Polish origins, so it's KLITZ-key, not Klick-key).

So, to keep the marriage intact, I've reverted to a more conservative approach. I've also added "media" to the name, since I've been so focused on that.

Thanks for understanding!

2009-02-17T13:13:00.005-06:00

Here's a question I can't seem to find an answer for:

What is the "minimum acceptable" number of editorial employees for a news organization?

Back in the "salad days" (called that in journalistic circles because, as a journalist, you could finally afford a restaurant that serves a salad with your meal) of the 90's, the unofficial rule of thumb for newspapers was that you should have one editorial employee for every 1,000 circulation. Of course, larger metros and major suburban papers were well above that ratio, but it was a measure that the industry seemed to readily accept.

With the waves of newsroom cuts over the past couple of years, however, I wonder if newspaper executives have given thought to what is an "acceptable" level of editorial staff as they struggle to mainatin financial stability. In other words, do they have an absolute minimum that they feel needs to exist before the product eventually becomes useless to its customers?

Granted, there were a number of jobs that existed in newsrooms over the past decade that could be eliminated without adversely affecting the newspaper's core mission. And, certainly, there was room for efficiencies in the editorial processes that staff trimmings forced.

But When you look at the numbers (15,333 jobs in 2008, and another 2,486 since January, according to the blog Paper Cuts), and consider that newspapers such as the Chicago Tribune have effective eliminated a third of their newsroom staffs, you have to wonder if there was THAT much inefficiency and redundancy in the newsroom processes, or if we have indeed crossed the threshold into endangering the reason readers still choose a newspaper or news web site.

So the question remains: What is the minimum acceptable number of newsroom employees for a news organization? If someone has an answer, I'd love to know.

2009-02-13T21:20:00.010-06:00

Flotsam for today;

*I've been following with interest the revised issue of charging for content, or micropayments, as a way to make newspapers profitable. This week, Charlie Rose brought the issue to the public eye in discussions with Walter Issacson of the Aspen Institute (and former Time Magazine editor), Mort Zuckerman of the New York Daily News and Robert Thomson of the Wall Street Journal. You can read a transcript here.

While the idea of micropayments is not an original idea, as bloggers from Michael Kinsley top Mark Potts have pointed out, there are two serious questions I have about the discussion:

1. It seems to be assumed that, before the Internet came around, people were paying for content by buying a newspaper. That is simply not true. Though I have never seen it monetized, it's unfathoimable that 50 cents covered the paper, ink, press, trucks, typewriters, pencils, notebooks, and ... most of all ... labor that went into the creation of the newspaper.

Plus, circulation directors played fast and loose with subscription rates, especially in areas where newspapers competed for audience. We practically gave away newspapers to readers, and the smart ones knew how to play the circulation game to keep from paying the standard circulation rate.

What paid the bills were the advertisers who wanted their message on the same pages with the content. The more people who read the paper, the more people who would see the ads. That's ususally what set the market.

In other words, newspapers don't sell content. They sell their audience. Always have, and most likely always will.

People will not pay for content today. It's way too late for that. But technology has gotten to a point where newspapers should look at providing packaging and convenience products. That may get readers to fork out a few bucks to cover some costs.

2. The Rose interview was titled "The Future of Newspapers." But where were the newspaper futurists? The entire interview relied on three old media people from East Coast operations, talking exactly like old media people. Where was Jeff Jarvis? Where was Mark Potts? How about Howard Finberg? Or Adrian Holovaty? How about people who are advocating or actually doing something new and exciting?

Let's look instead of developing new products and packages that will make readers WANT to pay a premium, instead of trying to force our customers to accept something they haven't accepted for decades.

* The full moon is out this week. As if legitimate organizations aren't reaching for straws to try to save the industry, along come a call to shut down news web sites for one week to dramatize just how much newspapers impact society.

Now I certainly appreciate where this guy is coming from and his intent is sincere. But in all honesty, would it make sense for news organizations to shut down the one product that is continuing to draw in readership and revenue? And for one week?

But ... and this is even more scary ... what if he were to pull this off, and nothing changes in newspaper circulation? What would THAT say?

* I had the honor to be the 'keynote' speaker at the suburban Chicago High School District 214 Journalism Day, addressing journalism students about the future of the business and how they should prepare for changes coming down the road. Although I probably came across more like Jason Vorhees than the Bluebird of Happiness, it was still reassuring to see an auditorium full of young adults who have a passion for the profession.

Thanks to District 214 and senior Jessica Loveless for allowing me the opportunity. It was reassuring to see that there's still a lot of enthusiasm and great potential for journalism in the next generation.

I just hope we don't screw it up for them.

2009-02-09T14:02:00.013-06:00

Do hacks and flaks still need each other?

News people vs. public relations/communications representatives. It's an alliance that has been at times as comfortable as ... say ... dogs and cats. But each side knows the importance of the other's mission and have operated as professional - and sometimes wary - partners.

However, with the industry is such a state of flux to the point that the many newspapers may cease to exist in the next couple of years, are those in the PR/communications field still consider newspapers as a viable vehicle to get their message out?

I posed that question to a number of public relations professionals recently to see if they were worried about the newspaper industry. The overwhelming response was, yes, they are. While many still say newspapers are among the best avenues to direct their message, they also realize emerging and new technologies ... especially in social networking ... also provide them with opportunities that newspapers currently don't.

The message was, more or less, yes, we still believe in newspapers, but we're getting the lifeboats ready if the ship sinks.

"Newspapers can reach a wide audience with lots of different interests. But if you narrow down your strategy, wouldn't it be much wiser to focus on relevant media?
" says Michael Reuling of the Netherlands. "For every subject/interest, there seems to be a blog, magazine and digital TV-channel nowadays. Focusing on the mass is still important, but if you can reach your target-group otherwise, do you really need a (print)newspaper?"

U.S.-based PR professionals are a bit more cautious outlining their relationship with newspapers. Newspapers are still an important part of their overall strategies, they say, and credibility still plays an important role in that strategy. Ironically, only a few were willing to go public with their thoughts, many saying they did not want to jeopardize existing relationships.

“Newspapers add credibility to PR," says Robin Parkinson, an L.A.-based marketing and communications consultant. "So ... down the road, if printed newspapers disappear, that a news Internet site might be approved say, by The Washington Post, or the NYT, it thereby validates a news site."

Parkinson's observations back up a recent Poynter/APME survey that shows online readers will trust news sites that are branded by newspapers they trust.

That is certainly good news for struggling newspapers. If your brand is credible in print, it'll remain credible wherever else you go.

But as newspapers trim down their sources, some PR people see their importance increase as publishers look for content to fill their pages.

"As first-level journalism resources, such as staff writers and wire services, are stretched thinner than ever before, newspapers are increasingly turning to public relations sources for material,” says Bob Dixon, and L.A.-based communications specialist.

However, Dixon also sees public relations taking up the flag if newspapers go away.

"P.R. will be more important than ever without newspapers," he said. "The increased fragmentation within media, especially online, has made it even more important for businesses and organizations to understand how to identify, target, and deliver their message in appropriate ways through an ever-increasing variety of news channels."

So it seems P.R. professionals still hold true to their relationship with newspapers. But they are also seeing the light and are adapting their strategies to get their message along other avenues of information distribution. In other words, the industry has a Plan B, and many are already using it.

The flaks will survive without the hacks. Can the reverse be said?

2009-02-05T00:19:00.009-06:00

Flotsam for today:

*God bless Roger Ebert.

The iconic Chicago Sun-Times movie critic recently re-discovered the joy of reading newspapers. I can't add any more, so read and enjoy.

Sadly, I doubt 20-somethings will ever learn the wonderfully tranquil experiences one can have with a newspaper. And it's a shame.

* Dark clouds form over Denver: The Denver News Agency has drafted a letter to customers that says, as of March 1, they'll be dealing with one newspaper in town -- The Denver Post. The DNA, which is the JOA arm of the two Denver papers and operated advertising and circulation operations, says the letter is preliminary and the dates are merely placeholders.

Scripps announced last year that the Rocky Mountain News is up for sale and has solicited bids for buyers. Scripps has been mum about potential buyers, but the talk on the street has not been good.

And with the rival Denver Post's owner, MediaNews Corp., interested in exercising its first rights of refusal with any potential buyer, it could effectively leave a Rocky buyer without a press, trucks, or ad salespeople.

Wait, is that a black glove suddenly appearing on Dean Singleton's hand?

*News item: A.H. Belo executives get bonuses on the same day that they announce staff layoffs. Belo must be using AIG's corporate playbook.

*Tired of all the bad news about newspapers, a group of news executives have started the newspaperproject.org, a site that they say "supports a constructive exchange of information and ideas about the future of newspapers."

Again, quoting the site: "Unlike websites that feature negative, gloom-and-doom stories about newspapers, this website will be devoted to insightful articles, commentary and research that provide a more balanced perspective on what newspaper companies can do to survive and thrive in the years ahead."

We could always use some good news in the industry, but I hope the projects founders do more than come up with ads that tout more people read the newspaper than watch the Super Bowl. As executives, I hope they can stir the pot of innovation to create and promote new and exciting products that can draw new readers and bring the business back into the black.

We can do all the cheerleading we want for newspapers, but if we don't back it up with plans for the future, it becomes nothing more than putting lipstick on a pig.

2009-02-03T19:52:00.007-06:00

Should The New York Times Ditch Paper, Distribute Kindle E-readers? | Technomix | Fast Company

Posted using ShareThis

An interesting proposal, to say the least. NYT gives away the Kindle to readers as a way to wean the paper off of ... well ... paper.

But can it be that much more cost prohibitive? Given the price of newsprint, ink, presses, the waste created by the printing process, the costs of gas, insurance, and trucks to deliver the product, is it that much more expensive than what we're doing now?

Frankly, this is the way newspapers should be going. Maybe Kindle is not the answer, but it is a good start. If we look at the business model of the wireless phone industry - practically give the hardware away, then charge for for personalized and premium services - we may be able to craft out a business plan that may actually bring in some money.

Any takers out there?

2009-02-02T13:41:00.011-06:00

I've discovered copy editors are a natural for Twitter.

Why?

140 characters is a luxury for a headline writer, who are traditionally copy editors. A copy editor must tell the gist of a story in as few as 10-12 characters. Those of you who have struggled with the infamous 1-38-3 headline setting can attest to that. Those of you who can write a 1-38-3 headline without breaking a sweat are supermen.

A good copy editor can tell his/her life story in 140 characters. For example:

"Raised by immigrant single mom, worked through skool, dogged into 1st job, pissed off ex-pres, survived pagination, now in online transition" (140 characters, w/o quote marks)

My advice to newspaper copy editors wondering what's next ... find a niche on Twitter. Success is almost assured!

UPDATE: Here are 7 reasons why the folk at Twitter think they'll be mainstream in a couple of years.

Like they aren't already?

2009-01-27T23:14:00.007-06:00

Here's some evidence that the Internet did not sneak up on newspapers. This 1981 TV news report from KRON in San Francisco talks about the start of Videotext, but touches on how all news on computers "is a few years off."

I was still a novice reporter in 1981, and only a couple years before, worked my way through college selling the Radio Shack computers pictured in the report. But, like most of us at that time, we were only beginning to realize the computer's impact on the newsroom.

Videotext didn't catch on ... maybe because it took 2 hours to download, or the $5 per hour connection charge, or it wasn't as 'spiffy' as the print edition. But you have to wonder why more newspapers didn't foresee the Internet's potential and worked to develop viable products as the Internet grew ... and print readers withered away.

2009-01-26T14:11:00.017-06:00

The Ringling Bros.-level political circus that Gov. Rod Blagojevich and the Illinois legislature have created just gets stranger every day.

The impeachment trial started today, but I've been mulling over the the guv's media blitz of the past few days, as he hopes to make his case in the court of public opinion. It's been interesting seeing Mr. Blagojevich become Mr. Metaphor as he constantly compares his plight with other great leaders, real or fictional.

In the past few days, Blago's compared his life with the likes of Ghandi, Martin Luther King, Nelson Mandela, Mr. Smith (who goes to Washington), George Bailey, and a Western movie star. He's compared his plight to Pearl Harbor Day.

Now, as noble as these metaphors are, I don't think they're quite accurate. So let's have a bit of fun. Who would you compare the governor to ... either living or fictional?

I'd had a couple in I had in mind:

1. Inspector Clouseau: The famed French "officer of the lewr" who bumbles his way through cases eventually winds up as the hero. But his heart was always in the right place, unlike Blagojevich, who we're not sure if he even keeps his heart on his person.

2. Monty Python's Mr. Gumby: The kerchief-topped Welsh miner tends to have the same out-of-touch look as Blagojeivch, and I think we're all waiting for the governor to eventually utter: "My ... brain ... hurts!"

3. The scarecrow from "The Wizard of Oz:" "If I only had a ..." naaaah, that one's TOO easy!

4. Dinsdale Piranha: Another Monty Python character. As you watch the guv make his way along the talk show circuit pleading his case, you can't help but wonder if he'd dogged by the idea that he's being followed by a giant hedgehog named Spiny Norman.

Twitter user genuine-rp noted that added if Blagojevich was a movie, he'd be like "Runaway Train."

Your turn to weigh in. What person ... real or fiction ... or movie would you compare Gov. Blagojevich to? Send me a note through the comments section, and I'll add them to the list.

2009-01-23T13:58:00.010-06:00

Now here's a novel idea. France's president announced the country will give free newspaper subscriptions to all 18-year-olds. It's an effort not only to help encourage young readers, but to help that country's struggling newspaper industry.

A nice effort, but I don't think young people aren't reading newspapers because they can't afford it. And, by age 18, many of their life habits have already been firmly established, so I don't see many "new" readers coming out of this.

France's money (as well as any money left here in the U.S.) would see better results if it were put into reading programs in elementary schools. Turning programs like Newspaper in Education from mere circulation tools into true newspaper-school cooperatives that build reading habits during a child's developmental years will go farther in developing potential newspaper customers by the time they reach adulthood.

Then, once they are there, newspapers need to develop products that fit young reader interests and needs as well. The "one size fits all" daily newspaper is no longer a sure thing for your potentially new readers in the world of Twitter and YouTube.

And ... most important of all ... it's not all about print. Newspapers must develop web products that can co-exist with your print products as well. Use your brand throughout your products to maintain credibility and develop loyalty.

Train them when they're young, and keep their interest with targeted products. That will go a lot farther than a free subscription.

2009-01-20T12:21:00.004-06:00

An addendum to my earlier list of new year's resolutions:

11. MARKET YOUR WEB SITE: That goes beyond placing points in the paper saying "see our Web site." After all, you if you haven't realized it yet, your brand is going only so far with readers nowadays. I recently saw a television ad for a northern Indiana newspaper that gives a scant recognition to the Web site. (On the other side of the spectrum, the Chicago NBC station has a TV ad that, while rather ambiguous, gives the impression that its Web site does more than just replay the 10 p.m. news). Your Web site may not be paying the full ticket yet, but don't expect it to pay more unless you start to aggressively pursue potential readers.

Just because you've built it, they won't necessarily come. Show them why they should.

Here are a few ideas to get your site in focus with readers:

1. One of my favorite ideas is to take a newspaper box and turn it into a "web box." Secure a monitor into the window where the print product was displayed and make sure it's running your home page. Or attach a monitor to a news rack and run your home page while copies of the print product are available for purchase. A nice way to meld old and new media, and with the number of potential purchase points running wifi, it should be easier to get this into the market than before. Have your circulation people involved in marketing your Web site as well as the paper, adn this could be a good start.

2. Look at places that offer wifi, like coffee houses, bookstores, casual restaurants. Are they willing to promote your site? Maybe as part of an ad deal? If it's a mom-and-pop operation, are they willing to make it the default page for folks who connect to the web at their business? Look at ways your Web site could benefit their business, and work to achieve a consensus. Both can prosper.

3.Check to see if your local library has a home page. If so, would they be willing to display a prominent link to your site? If not, would they be willing to use yours as a home page?

4. Viral marketing. How many employees do you have left? Each of them is a potential marketing tool. Give them handouts promoting the Web site (or special Web-only features) and have them get the word out in their communities. Give them talking points that they can use in casual conversation as they get out into the school organizations, church gatherings, social settings and barber shops. Every one of your employees should have a stake in the success of your operation, and this is one way to get them to help.

5. Speaking of viral, does your paper/website have a presence on social networking sites, like Facebook or Twitter? If so, are you actively using it to promote features, breaking news, invitations for story tips and/or reader-interactive projects? Are you promoting feedback on your posts?

6. Look within. When a customer comes into your reception area, is there anything there to tell them about your Web site? If you have niche Web sites, would a customer know that by walking into your building? Is there a monitor set up near the reception desk that displays your home page? Better yet, do you have a dedicated computer or two in your waiting area, so customers can look around on your site while they're waiting for their appointment?

One last thing...is your newsroom monitoring your competition's web sites the same way they monitor TV and radio? If not, your news gatherers are too busy staring at the paddock while the race is running behind them. Get dedicated Web monitors in your newsroom now, and make sure people are monitoring them!

2009-01-19T19:11:00.006-06:00

We survived the Bush administration. We can all take a deep breath now.

But why to I feel like George Bailey holding those 2 dollar bills after the run on the Bailey Savings and Loan?

2009-01-16T20:54:00.006-06:00

Slate's Jack Shafer offers a nice essay on how newspapers tried to invent the Internet, but failed. The Internet did not sneak up on newspapers, Shafer argues. Instead, newspapers became involved in it back in the 90s, but failed to do anything new or exciting for readers.

Shafer's essay is most interesting in the timeline he paints over the past century, where newspapers faced similar incursions from new developments, but did not act to embrace them. When radio came around, newspapers bought radio licenses and stations. When television appeared, they did the same. In the '70s and '80s, they dabbled in videotext (remember Viewtron?). In the '90s, some created fax editions.

It's interesting that, in every instance, newspapers acted more to squelch the emerging technology or try to mold it into a mirror image of its core print product.

And, in every instance, the industry failed to make anything of it.

Looking over all the advancements through the past 50 years and more, not one of them can attribute success to development out of the newspaper industry. You may say that television and radio news were successful outcroppings, but I argue that, with few exceptions, it developed from the evolution of the medium itself, and not through any mitosis from newspapers.

Granted, changes in technology rendered videotext and fax obsolete within a few years, which may have led newspapers to be more gun shy as the Internet began to develop. But even so, from the mid 90s to a few years ago, the majority of newspapers were still using Web sites primarily as a place enhance the print's classified sections, and adding print content as a draw for that.

What newspaper failed to do was recognize early on was that the Internet could not be an extension of the newspaper. As a result, potential revenue models were rendered useless by giving online readers content at no cost. In other words, they failed to realize the cash crop was not ink and paper, but the content that lies upon it. They were giving the gold away, figuring readers would buy the basket.

And we're still paying dearly for that mistake.

2009-01-14T22:18:00.006-06:00

We've been wringing our hands over reader commenting for years. What we in the industry had hoped would be the forum for intelligent, insightful discussion has in many cases become a freeforall among readers who are quite naive over the idea of "freedom of speech."

But there may be something productive coming out of commenting. The suburban Chicago Daily Herald readers' comments played a key role in local police finding out a convicted sex offender may be in violation of his probation.

According to the story, the local police chief was reading comment posted on the story of the man's conviction when he saw a comment that the guy was living with a woman and a small girl. Police went to the house and discovered that this was indeed the case, in violation of the probation conditions he not be in unsupervised contact with anyone under 18.

It'll be interesting to follow this in the courts to see just how much credence online comments hold in court. But this should be a wake-up call to those who think their anonymous comments are immune from the law.

Or, as one commenter on this story points out: "Wow...see, all the banter that goes on in here IS for good, sometimes. Nice detective work--and the rest of us? Watch out, we never know who's looking. ;-)"

UPDATE: New Zealand police catch a burglar using Facebook. Could social networking become the next Neighborhood Watch/Crimestoppers program?

2009-01-13T19:43:00.003-06:00

The Chicago Tribune goes tabloid!

The paper announced today that it will sell a tabloid version of the paper on newsstands throughout the city and suburbs. It will continue to provide the traditional broadsheet version to home delivery.

Bold and gutsy move ... and welcomed by those of us who have tried reading the Trib on a Metra commuter train, as well as the poor schleps sitting next to us and getting punched as we try to gracefully navigate the paper. Obviously trying to increase newsstand sales ... an area the tabloid Sun-Times has had the advantage for some time.

But I wonder if thought was put into a couple of areas:

1. The number of people who get home delivery for the purpose of taking the Trib with them on their daily commute. They will still get the broadsheet. Will they cancel home delivery to get the tabloid and effectively shift circulation, instead of build it?

2. At a time when newspapers can barely afford to print one edition ... and considering the parent Tribune Company is in bankruptcy proceedings ... just how long will the accountants allow them to print two versions of the same newspaper?

Why do I see the Trib eventually saying to its core readers: "Don't worry, you'll get used to the tabloid format"?

2009-01-08T12:00:00.014-06:00

I'm not one for new year's resolutions. Every year I resolve to lose 20 pounds and usually end up putting on 20. But considering the newspaper industry's rudderless descent into oblivion over the past few years, I'd like to see us all resolve to make 2009 a year of evolution, not de-evolution.

Here are a few resolutions I propose for the industry:

1. QUIT WHINING: Yes, times are bad. Talented people are losing their jobs and newspapers continue to bleed revenue. And it is sad. We'll probably lose more talented people this year, and some well-known nameplates will cease to exist. But our industry needs a good slap in the face to realize we can't continue to wallow in sorrow. We must get our collective act together and focus on long-term survival.

Let's have a good cry now. .............. OK, now let's go out and fix this broken thing.

2. FOCUS ON YOUR PRODUCT: If you're still using the words "newspaper" or "publishing" to describe your business, you're not focused on the right thing. It's not words and pictures on paper anymore. It's words and pictures. You have a vast wealth of information that is valuable to your readers and advertisers. It's just that a growing number don't want it on paper anymore. Figure out ways to parse your product and deliver it to your customers in a package that is inviting to advertisers, and possibly in a premium that readers would want to pay for.

3. FOCUS YOUR RESOURCES AT WHAT YOU DO BEST: You don't have the staff and resources to do cover everything anymore. Focus them on what you do best. For most newspapers, that is local news. Local sports. Local events. Stay in tune with your community and become its soul...it's guiding light. What you can't do on your own, rely on other sources ... including (GateHouse Media excluded) sources you consider 'competition.' Readers won't really care where the information comes from, as long as they can rely on you to bring it to them.

4. HELP YOUR STAFF STAY WITH THE CURVE: Remember pagination, when your copy desk took over the responsibility of designing pages? Your copy editors didn't have the electronic skills, so what did you do? You hired new editors who were skilled, and trained those who needed to learn. Staffers who didn't learn left or became obit writers. Today is no different. Changes in technology and the move to the web require your staff to be knowledgeable in new skills. Help your staff learn them. Train copy editors in HTML, CSS, PhotoShop, Flash, etc. Train reporters to use video and audio devices. Have them learn Flash, Audacity and other pertinent software. If you are hiring, look for people with these skills. Have them be your trainers and leaders. With a trained and knowledgeable staff, you'll be ready to make changes quickly and smoothly.

5. EMBRACE THE TECHNOLOGY: Think it's still all about your web site? That's so mid-2000's. There's a whole new world of technology out there that you should be looking at, and more coming down the pike. Think iPhone. Think Kindle. Think Twitter. If you're not looking at developing your brand to adapt to these sources of information delivery, odds are your audience will move on to the next great thing by the time you do. Keep an eye on what people are using, and what the next generation will bring. Be ready to adapt quickly. And have people on board that are always looking past the current fiscal year to help you avoid the icebergs.

6. KEEP MINING FOR REVENUE: The revenue well is running dry. Now's not the time to be looking into it. And don't pray for rain, because it won't come. Look at new audiences to serve, new ways of getting an advertiser's word out to the audience, and ways of providing "premium" services. If you can hit a combination of delivery and content that people would be willing to pay for, you've hit the mother lode.

7. LISTEN TO YOUR READERS. LISTEN TO YOUR NON-READERS: Your current readers will stay by your side as long as you continue to provide a quality product at a decent price with reliable delivery. But find you why people aren't reading you. Is it the what you offer? Is it how you package it? Is it how you deliver it? Find out what your non-readers are looking for. Then figure out a way to give it to them. Nurture your current audience, but start building new ones to sustain you

8. FIND YOUR NICHES: The Tribune Company had a hit with RedEye, which was accepted by 20-something urban readers as the metro newspaper of choice. So, they decided to redesign the flagship Chicago Tribune using cues they took from RedEye. Three months later, the negative reaction continues and the paper is backing off on some of the design cues. They call it a "work in progress," but it seems more like a "mea culpa." Instead of trying to tweak your one product to meet the needs of many, look at spreading your brand to many products that meet the needs of specific groups. You may never build your flagship's readership back to its glory days, but if you can build decent readerships among many targeted products, you can offset .. or eventually overtake ... the totals of the days gone by.

9. ENGAGE YOUR READERS: Reader comments on stories and reporter blogs are nice, but why not bring them further into the discussion? I'm intrigued by a program on Chicago's PBS station, where three average people dine at restaurants they all recommend, then gather on TV to talk about their experience at each eatery. The waiting list to be a guest reviewer is in the tens of thousands. Why not have your readers provide their take on local restaurants or businesses? How about doing a review of a movie or local theater? How about rating their favorite pizza place, convenience store, oil change shop? Take that information, develop a database. If enough favorable comments are posted, will the business owners be willing to pay for it for their marketing purposes?

10. TAKE A LEAP OF FAITH: Innovate, experiment, implement. Remember that Thomas Edison had just as many failures as he had patents. Be patient with new projects; let they try to build steam. If the plug needs to be pulled, don't be discouraged. Learn from your mistakes, and build on them for future projects. And, above all, don't lock yourself into thinking new revenue needs to linked to an active press.

That's a good start for now. Please send me a note if you have other resolutions, and I'll add them to the list.

Hopefully we'll all be around this time next year to review how well we did.

2009-01-01T16:54:00.003-06:00

The Chicago Blackhawks -- the hottest team in hockey now and the biggest thing in Chicago since, well, the '05 Sox -- come into Wrigley Field on New Year's Day and proceed to get blown away by the Detroit Red Wings.

Needless to say, it adds credence to my call to tear down Wrigley Field. End the curse once and for all!

2008-12-30T12:29:00.002-06:00

Just ran across the Web site "Stuff Journalists Like." Written by, I assume, a couple of out-of-work journalists from Colorado, the list is spot-on accurate and funny!

I just wish they opened a spot to submit suggestions, because the list could be easily expanded to include things like ... well ... "Deadline U.S.A." or "having your own column," or "having your own company-supported blog."

But it's a nice escape from the news about journalists recently, and I highly recommend it anytime you need a good laugh.

2008-12-29T13:21:00.008-06:00

This item caught my eye while getting caught up on things over the holiday. GateHouse Media is suing New York Times Co., the owners of the Boston Globe, for using Gatehouse content verbatim on the Globe's "Wicked Local" community news site.

GateHouse claims such use is a violation of copyright laws. NYT says what it is doing is not unlike what many others are already doing on community news sites.

This is a battle that will need to be closely watched next year. If GateHouse comes out victorious, it could have a chilling ... no, make that ice age ... effect on the further development of community news sites. And that chill could very well be felt from small bloggers to the Huffington Post ... and even Google and Yahoo.

The question of whether content is proprietary has been the 800-pound gorilla in the community news room. As bloggers, aggregators and new products (like the Tribune Co. "breaking news" site) have been built on borrowing from other sources, those who have been borrowed from have, for the most part, looked the other way.

And with newspapers forced to cut back on its own resources, it is turning to linking to others ... including competing sites ... to provide information it can no longer obtain on its own.

GateHouse has decided to push the issue. If the courts rule this as an infringement of copyright laws, it will be interesting to see what transpires. Will this create a need for written permission to link to content? Will it create a new cottage industry for copyright lawyers? Or will it drive a knife through smaller, upstart sites as the big media companies suddenly say "mine" and don't share?

Ironically, GateHouse has prided itself in being a leader in the transition into electronic media and community journalism. It will be interesting to see if it is the company that, effectively, kills off the new evolution.

* Here's a wonderfully reflective piece on Chicago journalism. Makes me want to have a shot and a beer in honor of Mike Royko.

2008-12-28T18:41:00.009-06:00

Paul Zilly's name will probably never be engraved in the Newseum. His name probably won't be remembered among journalistic heavyweights like Pulitzer, Hearst, Graham, or McCormick.

But Paul embodied the meaning of community journalism, and for the folks in Crystal Lake, Ill., Paul was every bit a newspaperman as those heavyweights.

Paul recently died at age of 83. As publisher of the Crystal Lake Herald ... the predecessor to today's Northwest Herald ... Paul was the newspaper, and the newspaper was the community.

I had the honor to work for him right before he retired in 1983, shortly after the company that owned the paper was sold to Shaw Media. A quiet and affable man, Paul had a wonderful sense of humor and strong love for his community. It was a love that I, as a way-too-young managing editor, learned to appreciate and respect.

I was thankful for Paul hiring me as editor, although I had little experience beyond reporting. I remember being called to the interview after spending an all-nighter covering a local news story. I arrived wearing the same clothes I had on the day before with a day-old growth of beard and hair crying out to be washed. He carried on the interview without wincing once, but at the end asked "One last question...will you shave if offered the job?"

Paul's first piece of advice to me was "don't make waves." But I didn't listen to him and quickly found myself challenged by some of the town's more influential people. But Paul always stood beside me and defended my decisions and actions. Later, when the fires subsided, he'd give me a quick lesson on diplomacy. Those lessons were valuable the next time we'd cross swords with the town leaders.

Paul didn't want us to make waves, but I think he enjoyed it when we rocked the boat.

Most of all, Paul taught me the value of community journalism and its impact on readers. How Little League games had the same importance to the community as what went on in Springfield and Washington. How people and what makes them unique is as important as council meetings.

He taught me how to use the paper to celebrate great things. How to mourn a loss. How to listen to what readers have to say, and how to give them what they're looking for in a newspaper.

Shortly after Paul announced his retirement (just after Shaw took over the paper ... and to this day I still believe he didn't want to go), I was working a booth at a local business expo. Every one who visited that booth had a story about Paul. Some loved him and the paper. Others hated him and the paper. But they all were sad to see him leave, because they all knew Paul loved the paper, and he loved Crystal Lake.

Paul taught me a lot in the short time I worked with him, and he continues to be an inspiration. Paul knew the newspaper was the heart of its community. A good newspaper is read and embraced by its community. Readers may love it, or they may hate it, but they read it every day because they knew those pages reflected the community's soul.

Paul Zilly was the embodiment of all things Crystal Lake. And the Crystal Lake Herald reflected that. On top of that, he was also a great guy.

Thanks for the life lessons and the memories, Paul.

Godspeed.

2008-12-17T12:15:00.024-06:00

The news about newspapers certainly hasn't been bright this holiday season. Announcements of more layoffs, cutbacks in service and companies going bankrupt have tarnished the spirit for most of us who care about the institution of journalism.

But if you look beyond the headlines, the heart of journalism is still alive and beating. Many newspapers, in fact, are living that great movie "Deadline U.S.A."

For those of you who are unfamiliar with it (and I strongly encourage you to get familiar with it, if you can find a copy), "Deadline U.S.A." is a 1952 film starring Humphrey Bogart as Ed Hutcheson, the editor of the mythical New York Day newspaper. The film starts with the the newspaper staff finding out ... through an alert over the wires ... that the Day's owners are selling to a rival, who will shut the paper down.

While the specter of the Day's demise hangs overhead, a reporter finds a powerful union chief had a hand in the murder of a young woman. Bogey spends most of the movie working with his staff to seal the expose, while fighting with the owner's family to keep the Day in business.

The film ends as the paper is ready to print its final edition, The union chief threatens Bogey over the phone if the story runs. Bogey, in the pressroom, speaks to him as the presses begin rolling.

"What? I can't hear you. What's that noise?" the union boss asks.

"That's the press, baby. The press. And there's nothing you can do about it. Nothing!" Bogey responds.

As the Day breathed its last gasp, Bogey and his crew go out with the biggest expose in the city. In essence, "Deadline U.S.A." is the "It's A Wonderful Life" for newspaper people.

Fast forward to 2008. In Chicago, the Tribune Company is in bankruptcy, yet the flagship paper continues to churn out investigative stories and, recently, intensely cover the arrest of the governor of Illinois on charges of conspiracy. Its rival, the Sun-Times, which has been in economic intensive care for the past several years, continues to be a dominant player in the Chicago news.

In Detroit, newspapers teetering on bankruptcy are cutting back on staff and eliminating home delivery on several days, yet the reporters and editors there continue to investigate and report on the corruption case surrounding the city's former mayor.

Similar scenarios are playing out in Denver, Miami, Seattle, San Jose and many other cities across the nation.

In this tenuous time, newsrooms continue to pursue the mission of great journalism. Just like the reporters and editors of the Day, today's journalists are not losing focus of the core mission Hutcheson espoused: To inform, investigate, expose. To be a watchdog and a servant for the public good.

As Hutcheson said, "it's not the oldest profession. But it's the best."

And as long as we remember why we went into this profession ... to be watchdog and servant for the public good ... great journalism will survive. The presses may eventually fall silent, but great journalism will continue as long as there are people who are dedicated and loyal to the mission.

Because THAT is the press, baby. And there's nothing they can do about it.

2008-12-15T19:35:00.006-06:00

Every time I watch this I think:

If those of us in the Illinois media acted this way sooner with Gov. Blagojevich, would we all be in the situation we're in today?

2008-12-08T13:24:00.004-06:00

Random thought for the day:

The Tribune Co. files for bankruptcy. McClatchy shops for buyers for flagship Miami Herald. Scripps puts the Rocky Mountain News on the block.

Is this our version of the Big 3?

And ... in all seriousness ... on the face of it, who'd want to bail out this industry?

2008-12-05T13:01:00.018-06:00

"When I left you I was but the learner. Now I AM THE MASTER," the evil Darth Vader said to Obi-Wan Kenobi in the first "Star Wars."

Could Dean Singleton become the Darth Vader of Denver? With E.W. Scripps' announcement that the Rocky Mountain News is for sale, it's a possibility.

Singleton, who is president of the parent company of the Rocky's rival Denver News, could potentially be a likely suitors for the Rocky. Alan Mutter even suggests that Singleton's MediaNews Group could be the most likely buyer.

Singleton hasn't said if he is interested in purchasing the Rocky. But he did say in the Post that he didn't think Scripps would find a buyer.

Given the current economic climate, I also doubt there will be much interest in the Rocky, despite its long history of being the scrappy tabloid that reflected the attitude of the pioneers that built the city at the foot of the Rocky Mountains. But, as Sam Zell pointed out recently, investors can't cash in on Pulitzer prizes.

And, given the Post's dominance in the market, I doubt anyone outside the industry would be interested in buying a struggling newspaper in a competitive market at a time when those in the market are all struggling for survival.

So, at first blush, MediaNews would seem like the ideal buyer. Considering the two papers have a JOA that combines a number of functions in circulation and advertising, and the papers share space in the same downtown building, there would be little else to consolidate.

So why would MediaNews want two newspapers in the same market? To answer that, we need to look at Dallas in 1991. Dallas was a two-newspaper town, dominated by the Belo Corp.'s Dallas Morning News and an afternoon competitor, the Dallas Times Herald. The Times Herald, like the Rocky, had a reputation of being the scrappy underdog that continually nipped at the heels of the more conservative News. Its stable included columnists like Molly Ivins, Skip Bayless and Joe Bob Briggs. A young reporter named Jim Lehrer covered the Kennedy assassination for the paper. It had 3 Pulitzers on its trophy shelf, including one for the infamous photo of Jack Ruby killing Lee Harvey Oswald.

In the late 80's, a young entrepreneur named William Dean Singleton bought the paper from Times Mirror for a song, and after a few years of extensive cutbacks in staff and resources, he sold the paper to Belo in 1991. The next day, Belo shut down the Times Herald, thereby eliminating the News' major competition in Dallas.

Back to today. Singleton is now in the catbird seat to give the Denver Post sole possession of the market. MediaNews Group could easily develop a package to buy the Rocky and, with a single slash from his corporate lightsabre, Singleton could eliminate the Rocky, absorbing what assets it has left into the Post's operation.

If this does play out, it'd a win-win situation for Singleton and MediaNews Group. But It'd also be a big loss for Denver and the newspaper industry, as the Rocky would be added to the list of great metropolitan newspapers that have bitten the dust over the past two decades.

I stress that this is only one of many scenarios. A buyer could come through for the Rocky ... maybe a noble billionaire as Rocky columnist Mike Littwin hopes. But that scenario ... especially in light of the N.Y. Time's revelation that McClatchy is trying to find a buyer for the Miami Herald ... is the least likely out there.

Or, Scripps may not find a deal to its liking and just close up shop on its own, which would still give Singleton a monopoly in Denver without him moving a finger.

But if Singleton does become a player in the Rocky's sale, the irony would be significant.

Or, in the words of Lord Vader: "The circle is now complete."

UPDATE DEC. 15, 9:10 p.m.: OK, with MediaNews now teetering on the edge of bankruptcy, I now doubt this scenario will play through.

But, I wouldn't be surprised to see Scripps and MediaNews "merge" the two organizations, eliminating one nameplate or maybe making one online only. The question would only be: Who will be willing to absorb all that debt?

2008-12-05T00:06:00.002-06:00

Doc in a (wifi) box

Why haven't doctors' offices realized what a service they could provide if they had wifi access in their waiting rooms? It suddenly hit me today as I sat for more than an hour, waiting for my elderly mother, reading a six-month-old copy of National Geographic and trying my bets to feign interest in the material.

I've expressed this idea to a number of doctors and dentists whose waiting rooms I know well thanks to my parents and teenage kids. But every time I've been met with a blank stare from the office managers, or at least a blank "I'll mention it to the doctor" reply as they gratefully take my check for the visit.

I can't be the only person who sits in these offices thinking "think of how much I could get done if only I could connect my laptop." (Disclosure: I do not have a smartphone. My phone is on a pay-as-you-go plan because I have a real fear of committing to a multi-year contract, and I have a cool phone number that I'm not willing to lose by switching phone plans). I'm not sure if anyone has studied just how much productivity time is lost by Boomers shuffling their parents and kids to medical centers, but I would certainly believe given the ability to make up that time, we'd easily jump on it.

Next time you're stuck in a waiting room shuffling through ragged copies of Sports Illustrated or some upscale mag of places and things you could never afford, tell the office manager to get some wifi in the waiting room, so you and your fellow room occupants can get some work done.

If enough of us speak out, maybe our insurance will cover that as well.

2008-12-04T00:30:00.005-06:00

More layoffs at the Chicago Tribune ... four months after the paper let 80 editorial folks go.

Cashing in on Pulitzers is one thing, but at what point do you give up monetizing on your own content?

UPDATE, FRIDAY, DEC. 5, 9:05 P.M.: Michael Miner's NewsBites blog lists some of the 11 people let go. Longtime writer Charles Storch, national writers Stevenson Swanson and Lisa Anderson, metro reporters Courtney Flynn and Deborah Horan, photographers Milbert Brown and Jim Prisching, and assistant travel editor Phil Marty.

2008-12-03T13:58:00.014-06:00

I guess we did not have to lock Steve Outing in a room with corporate turnaround specialists. In his E&P column this week, Outing outlines an 11-point game plan for newspaper executives to turn around their struggling businesses.

While most of his points have been espoused by many digital experts over the years (think digital first, consolidate print and online editorial functions, experiment with new and unique products), Outing hits three points that I'm sure will have publishers squirming over: Stop chasing young readers in print, continue to serve your core (older readers), and help them to migrate to digital media. What this basically translate to is: yes, print is dying, but don't go suddenly. Help your current loyal readers make the move to newer methods of information delivery, and develop methods and products that will attract and keep your new readers.

Probably not a direction a company with the word "publications" in its title may want to face up to, but it is a reality nonetheless.

He also stresses the need to leverage yourself into social media, which is an area most newspaper leaders are still looking at as an interesting toy without much value (much the same way they looked at the Internet back in the ... well, up until a couple of years ago). As we've seen with Obama's highly successful campaign and, mst recently, with the impact Twitter made in distributing information during the terrorists attacks in Mumbai, this is the new community people are turning to for news and information. Ignoring social networking is basically ignoring a key chance to build and retain new customers.

One area I wish he stressed more is the need for building "communities" or "niches." I hate the word "niche" because it is still pretty heavily tied to the term "special sections," much in the same way "communities" is tied to geography. As a spinoff from social networking, publishers need to look at their communities beyond geography ... communities of lifestyles, interests, hobbies, opinions ... and develop specialized products (beyond print 'special sections') to bring these communities together to inform, share and entertain.

Outing's final point, however, is one that make corporate sense; "Consider retirement." Give Steve credit for saying what many are thinking: Maybe it's time to clean house at the top and bring in people who are not afraid to take that leap of faith. You don't need a Sam Zell in a leadership role to create a shift in the business model, but you need someone who is not so tied up to the "way things were" that he cannot see the cultural shift that is leaving the newspaper industry in the dust. There's a lot of catching up to do, and maybe the best way to do that is to bring in fresh thinking at the top.

But how many CEOs, publishers, or even executive or managing editors will agree and step down from their six-figure jobs for the sake of the industry's future? I think we all know the answer to that.

I hope Outing's column is in the room when the next API 'crisis summit' convenes. I hope the leaders read it and ponder it long and hard. But not too long. The industry needs to move, and quickly. This is a good guidline to build upon.

So let's stop bemoaning the status quo and start building the future.

2008-11-25T13:36:00.009-06:00

If nothing else, you have to give Sam Zell credit for punching the right buttons among the journalism traditionalists.

In a recent interview with Conde Nast Portfolio editor Joanne Lipman, Zell basically discounts the importance of journalism awards in the newspaper industry, or as he puts it:

"I haven't figured out how to cash in a Pulitzer Prize."

This has created quite a stir, that the man in charge of some of the most prestigious award-winning newspapers in the country doesn't think much of using that as leverage for drawing readers back to newspapers.

But, if you step back a bit, he makes a good point. After all, if Pulitzers were as highly treasured by readers as they are by the journalism community, then papers such as the L.A. Times and N.Y Times should not be suffering the same fate as the rest of the industry. And, as we're finding out with L.A., a trophy case full of awards hasn't stopped the bleeding of readership from newspapers.

This is not to say that the basis for journalism awards are not important, but I have long believed that many newspapers have been so awards-focused that they have lost sight of what readers really want. No one has won a Pulitzer for providing outstanding coverage a community's spirit, or detailed information of the happenings of the local Little League, or giving readers information on a great restaurant in town. Yet in many cases this is what is suffering as newspapers downsize and tighten their scope of coverage.

Awards basically stroke the ego of the newspapers and journalists involved. They really do nothing to attract and retain readers. What will attract and retain them is refocusing the energy used to produce award-worthy stories into content that catches your community's attention and makes them run to your paper or web site when they need a fix of local news.

Maybe if someone created an award for that, more publishers would take notice.

2008-11-19T14:16:00.005-06:00

Today's flotsam (with thanks to Romenesko for an unusually large number of odd stories today):

*I assume we'll be seeing more of this as the privileged generation comes face-to-face with the end of prosperity.

Can't wait to see how she explains this on her resume!

*At least you could call this an "innovative" approach to the newspaper crisis.

My take is that Longmont newspaper may soon see a re-enactment of the French Revolution. Are guillotines legal in Colorado?

2008-11-17T13:15:00.012-06:00

I've been worried about the future of the newspaper industry for quite some time now.

I'm even more worried today.

After reading some of feedback from last week's "Crisis Summit" sponsored by the American Press Institute, I've become even more convinced that the industry as we know it will die at the hands of its current leaders.

Some 50 newspaper executives gathered at API's headquarters to discuss with corporate turnaround experts how to stop the sinking, but left the session "to reconvene in six months, and to explore additional collaboration."

Explore collaboration? Isn't this something several media experts have been expressing for years? And take six months to "explore?" How many more jobs and readers will the industry lose during this exploratory phase? How many newspapers publishers will stop their its presses because they can no longer afford to run them?

I'm glad API hosted such a summit. They've been very forward in trying to help newspapers redefine themselves through innovative programs such as Newspaper Next. But, they brought together the wrong people. Industry leadership, as evidenced by some of the reaction to Newspaper Next, have basically been a group of lemmings just waiting for someone to lead them to the water. Anyone can take the lead ... just not them.

Come back in six months? Sure ... maybe a few of us will still be around.

API didn't need the executives in that room last week. They needed the folks who know better than to walk off the cliff, but have the experience and knowledge to find a path to a new business model. Guys like Steve Outing ... Rob Curley ... Howard Finberg. They recognize the disruptive forces that are adversely affecting the industry. Maybe locking them in a room with some corporate turnaround specialists, they can develop a model that an "alpha" dog of a newspaper publisher can test and modify into something that can save the industry.

I used to think change needed to come slowly to the industry, but a generation of neglect and indifference to a changing market and readership has put newspapers in the crisis its in now. The collapsing economy has only hastened the emergency.

We need more alpha dogs and fewer lemmings. Until that comes about, I'll continue to lose sleep.

UPDATE 11/18 12:40 p.m.: Steve Outing Twittered my idea of locking him up with a few other "websperts" and corporate turnaround specialists. Not sure if he favored it, and in retrospect I think "locking up" may be a bit harsh (not to mention being locked up with corporate-suit-types may violate the Constitutional protection against cruel and unusual punishment.) Thanks for the shout-out, Steve.

Outing's blog today has a response from a participant of the API summit, who clarifies the six-month timeframe was not correct. Read it here.

It's nice to know that the leaders there recognize the immediacy of finding solutions without waiting for someone else to do it. But it won't affect my sleep patterns just yet.

2008-11-13T18:26:00.007-06:00

Video journalist and emerging media expert Michael Rosenblum wrote a wonderful "open letter to a newspaper editor" on his blog, following up on a speech to the Society of Editors in the U.K.

It's a follow up to a question one editor asked: Whether he should put video on his Web site. A simple no-brainer answer, but Rosenblum takes it one ... no maybe four or five ... steps further by suggesting you could actually build a revenue model around video. By using video to supplement your sagging classified market, use video to advertise services and mark occasions (Rosenblum mentions video weddings and charge for the service).

Not really a traditional service of newspapers, but why not? By doing so, Rosenblum concludes, you make your paper "into the video information and public discussion node for your community." Translate back to my previous postings that local will be the battleground for newspapers' survival. You own your market, and you will live to print another day.

Unfortunately, I still think too many local publishers are blind to the potential video has for the Web in local news AND advertising. They still look at it as TV for the Internet and oftentimes are misled by the photographers that still look at video with an editorial/advertising bias.

Frankly, any newspaper that still has the word "Publications" in its corporate title probably won't get it.

2008-11-10T14:21:00.006-06:00

Hey, bloggers ... what's the best way to give your readers the big fat middle finger and tell them "I don't give a rat's patoote to what you think?"

You do what Chicago Tribune columnist and blogger Eric Zorn recently did. You stop accepting comments from your readers.

Apparently not happy with the quality of comments and debates he was dealing with, Zorn announced that he'd turned off reader comments on his "Change of Subject" blog. You can still make comments on his Chicago Tribune columns, but forget about getting into debates with anything he posts on 'Change.'

I can certainly understand Zorn's reasoning. The ability to post comments anonymously to blogs and mainstream web media has unleashed a tsunami of commenters who think the First Amendment's freedom of speech provision gives them the right to say whatever they want, regardless of truth, logic or without regard to others' plights of feelings.

Unfortunately, they don't realize that "Freedom of Speech" is a misnomer. While it does guarantee that government cannot infringe on speech rights, it doesn't allow complete freedom. If that were the case, then libel and slander laws would not exist.

Nonetheless, these folks who hide in anonymity and post vicious, untrue and or downright tasteless comments have seriously clouded the forum of debate and discussion that was the basis of Web 2.0. It's a problem for all who all commenting, and Zorn is not unique to the situation.

However, to eliminate all comments from your blog is, basically, a big step backward into Web 1.0. The whole basis for blogging is to create a community for discussion and debate. Without this, you revert back to the one-way dialog. You've cut the heart out of your blog.

I admire and respect Zorn. He's one of the few Tribune columnist worth his salt and was also a leader for the paper into the Web 2.0 world. But, Eric, to cut comments from your blog, aren't you basically saying "I don't like who's moving into my forum community, so I'm shutting the gate?"

And, if one compared these anonymous commenters are the al-Queda of Web 2.0, wouldn't you say that by ending commenting, the terrorists have won the battle for Web 2.0?

Frankly, I'm a firm believer that if you're not willing to put your name and face behind what you say, then I doubt you really believe what you say. And I think Eric Zorn also believes that. But it's a shame that he's thrown the baby out with the bathwater.

The commenting communities in Web 2.0 are indeed a wild west. We need more bloggers out there -- especially in the mainstream -- to fight to bring balance and sanity to web discussion and debate. It's sad that a good one has given up the fight.

2008-11-07T19:07:00.008-06:00

Something happened today that earned President-elect Barack Obama my full respect.

Yes, I did vote for him, but not because I thought of him as the definitive candidate. I still have concerns about his ability to be a strong leader and am eagerly awaiting to hear who he'll have surrounding him as his closest advisers during these troubling times.

But today, he did something that was truly impressive. And it didn't involve the economy, the war in Iraq, or picking a transition team.

In the morning, he and his wife went to their children's school in Chicago to attend teacher-parent conferences.

Think about it. Here is someone who only days ago was handed the keys to the most powerful country in the world. Someone who has been built to almost Messiah status by the millions of Americans cast ballots for him and now are looking for him to lead America out of the economic morass it's dealing with now.

He could have easily spent the morning cloistered with advisers, business leaders, political planners and international experts trying to develop plans to solves the country's wrongs.

But, instead, he chose to be a dad to his two daughters.

I'm sure that the challenge of balancing family time with the needs of America and the world will be far greater once Obama takes office. But for this moment, he's showing that he won't abdicate his responsibility as a father in order to achieve his career goals.

And because of that, I feel a bit more comfortable that the new president will have his priorities in order when he steps into the Oval Office.

2008-11-05T20:09:00.004-06:00

Are newspapers dying? Consider this:

-- The New York Times and Chicago Tribune printed 50,000 more copies of the Nov. 5 edition after papers sold out.

-- The Washington Post is printing 250,000 extra copies of the same edition for keepsake collectors

-- People lined up at the Chicago Sun-Times printing plant to obtain copies of the paper.

-- In Atlanta, Detroit, Denver, Dallas, Birmingham and many other cities, circulation directors found newsstands empty as people bought up every copy they could find.

When an event of historic proportion occurs, people want mark the occasion - and make it personal - with a keepsake.

Traditionally, that has been the day's newspaper.

As wonderful as the web and social networking has made the dissemination of news, one thing that it can't do is provide a tactile, lasting memory of history -- whether it's the election of the nation's first black President or the engagement announcement of a family member. They want something they can put in a bookcase and pull out to show future generations.

Web sites and social sites like Facebook can chronicle history, but are not tactile. They are too focused on the present to preserve the moment of the past. Twitter's history is fleeting.

I wonder -- and worry -- what we'll use to mark history in the 2012 election.

2008-10-31T13:50:00.007-05:00

I'm kind of surprised by MediaNews Group vice president of research Matt Baldwin's recent letter to Romenesko wondering why newspapers beat themselves up over circulation reports?

I certainly agree with Baldwin that as the reading public's habits have changed, so to do should the way the print media measures itself.

But, to answer Baldwin's question, newspapers beat themselves up over declining circulation because that's how they measured their success in the past and it's the foundation for which its key revenue streams are based. Until that culture is changed, the teeth-gnashing and self-flagellation will continue.

Circulation figures go back to the days when manufacturing was king in America. Each newspaper copy was, in business terms, a widget. The more widgets you make, then it stands to reason that the more readers you have. Therefore, display ad rates (and in come cases, classified, too) are calculated on the measure of how many papers you produce (although those in the business know that newspaper ads were sold more like used cars, and depending on the ad rep, you could almost cut any deal you want).

Newspaper execs see a direct correlation between declining circulation figures and their ability to charge as much as they do on ad rates. Falling circulation equals cheaper ads. Cheaper ads plus declining advertisers (plus the inclusion of less-expensive forms of advertising, such as ad inserts) equal less profit. Less profit equals cutbacks in staff and content. It becomes what is shaping up to be a death spiral.

Now, Baldwin notes figures from Scarborough Research, which does provide more depth in readership trends and marketing potential. And there is validity to moving measurement standards to another form. The Chicago Sun-Times tried that tactic several years ago using Scarborough figures that noted a copy of the S-T was read 2.5 times a day. They billed themselves as "Chicago's best-read newspaper" and quoted a readership of well over 1 million. Unfortunately, the advertisers, public and competition in general didn't buy that argument.

Baldwin brings up a good point; maybe it's time to change how we measure our readership and, in turn, set the standards for which print newspapers charge for advertising. But this will have to be a unified effort of the industry, which has shown little unity in new ideas during the past .. oh ... 100 years or so.

As long as the "circulation=ad rates=profitability" culture remains the accepted standard, not much else will change.

2008-10-29T13:40:00.008-05:00

Yesterday's announcement that the Christian Science Monitor would eliminate its daily print edition in favor of a primarily web-based outfit was met with a shiver from many in the industry. But while the demise of the daily print edition (a weekend edition will still be printed) is a cause for pause, CSM's transition to web-only could provide some insight on how the industry as a whole can make the switch.

I stress SOME insight. While CSM is considered a newspaper, there are many parts of its business model that made it different from a traditional daily newspaper. And, from the initial readings, those factors are the catalyst for the transition.

For example, CSM is a national daily that is delivered via mail. As a result, its content was less focused on event news and more on analytical and enterprise pieces. In effect, the stories were more like a news magazine such as Time or Newsweek.

As a result, the readership was more niche than general interest. Although national, it's circulation never far above the 200,000 average it enjoyed in its heyday. A far, far cry from Wall Street Journal or USA Today. More recent numbers have it at around 50,000, which makes it an even more expensive product to produce on a regular basis, given the resources and delivery methods it incorporates.

Unless significant changes are made to the vision and mission of CSM, I could see its web presence becoming less of an electronic newspaper and more of an analytical e-zine -- much like a Slate without the punditry. With its continued financial and moral support from the Church of Christ, Scientist, CSM online could easily weather early revenue losses to develop a voice and audience over time.

I certainly hope a journalism think-tank such as API or Poynter watches closely -- or even documents -- what CSM does to make the transition. There will certainly be opportunities and mistakes taken along the way, and some of the lessons learned could provide valuable for other organizations looking to develop a web-print synergy -- or make a similar transition to web-only.

There will be lessons learns and valuable advice. What there won't be is a "one-size-fits-all" solution for newspapers.

2008-10-23T13:24:00.004-05:00

It frustrates me to no end to see newspapers try to be "innovative" by relying on old, outdated methods and measures.

Currently, I've seen two news organizations try to improve their offerings by polling their readers. Reader surveys are not new, and frankly worked quite well in the past when the paper needed tweaking or freshening up. But, in today's world, there is a basic flaw with reader surveys: You're asking people who are already paying for your product. They, in turn, will most likely tell you they like what they're getting, with maybe a suggestion or two that would improve their experience.

While the concept is right ... finding out what customers want ... they are going after the wrong crowd. Yes, it's nice that you are finding out what people who get your newspaper want. But there is a much bigger crowd out there who are not taking your newspaper. Why is that? Isn't that who you want to tap into right now?

Instead of reader polls, try other sources. One area to look at is online. You have a number of subscribers online who probably comment on news stories. While you probably included a line in your terms of service that their private information would not be sold to third-party vendors, there is certainly nothing wrong with using them to find out if A) they also get your print product and B) if not, why?

I'd also add a C) if you were putting together a news product that met your needs, what would you include and in what form would you use it? Maybe add a D) if you knew of such a product, would you pay for it, and if so, how much?

How many news organizations have asked those questions to non-readers and online readers? My guess is not many. But, as someone with a vested interest in this industry, that is information that would be worth millions in determining what products to create in the future.

American Press Institute has done a wonderful job setting up this basis in its "Newspaper Next" project, under the catchphrase of "Jobs to be Done." Newspapers need to realize that, in order to gain new readers, they need to talk to those who aren't customers in order to find ways to get to them.

Don't neglect your loyal readers ... that's what customer service is for. But they are not going to carry you through the current crisis. News orgs need new customers, and they need to provide exactly what those new customers want.

The only real way to find out is to ask them.

2008-10-16T14:11:00.003-05:00

* OK...my ego's back to normal today. Found out earlier this week that Tribune Co. president Randy Michaels circulated my assessment of TribCo.'s chicagobreakingnews.com to company execs. Although prefacing "don't start paying attention to blogs," he used mine to tout the new site as a hit and that future products should have a similar focus.

Nice to know this lowly scribe can be such an big influence. Wished my wife was as easily swayed.

* More good things ... I love blogger Chris O'Brien's recent entry on ten little things newspapers can do now to reinvent the newsroom.

The beauty of O'Brien's suggestions is that they are small, cheap and not too labor intensive. But more importantly, they create portals by which folks in the newsroom can interact with their readers. This can break down walls that keep reporters and editors from knowing what their readers are interested in, as well as keep an eye on the community's pulse and be more flexible in changing directions if the need warrants it.

The problem with newsroom reinvention is that too many of them are focused on trying to do major overhauls, when tweaking would better serve the cause.

I'd bet if a newsroom just enacted one or two of O'Brien's suggestions, it'd improve staff morale and confidence much more than a total overhaul of the operation. And, frankly, that'd go a long way in retaining newsroom talent ... something that we as an industry need to be very, very worried about right now.

2008-10-13T20:30:00.003-05:00

News Alert: Bat Boy makes a killing after selling everything before the stock market crash; buys the Weekly World News!
(It's a dirty little secret in the industry, but every credible journalist's dream is to do the definitive Bat Boy interview for WWN)

2008-10-10T18:53:00.005-05:00

I hate to start sounding like a shill for the Tribune Company, but I've got to admit that they finally have a product that "gets it" in growing and retaining new readership online.

It's chicagobreakingnews.com. Powered by the Chicago Tribune and its other media roles (WGN TV and radio and the cable CLTV), its an aggragator of breaking news in the Chicago region. The more I've been following it, the more I like it.

What makes it work is simple ... and it's what I've been espousing since the start of this blog:

1. It uses its own content (compiled from its various TribCo web sites) to highlight the breaking news it does best.

2. What content it can't provide is gathered from its print and broadcast competitors. Note the right-side rail with headlines from all the competing Chicago TV stations, Suburban newspapers, and it's main competitor, the Chicago Sun-Times.

3. It's all packaged in an easily navigable home page.

4. And most importantly, from the looks of it, it's very labor-UNintensive.

I would expect that, as more people discover it, it will gain popularity as the place to go for breaking news in Chicago...maybe even more so than the Tribune Web site. And as more eyes come to chicagobreakingnews, the more valuable it will become for advertisers.

Plus ... if TribCo execs are savvy enough ... it could become even more of a revenue tool by providing direct delivery and or e-blasts to customers for a modest fee.

And, I would expect as the competitors study their readership numbers, they see more eyes coming to the story from chicagobreakingnews.com, but then going back when they're through.

At its core, it goes to what is becoming new reader loyalty. It doesn't matter where the content originates. Readers will be loyal to the one who delvers the news in a format and timetable that meets their lifestyle needs.

Don't know if this is one of Lee Abram's brain children, but if it is, maybe there is some substance behind his Col. Kurtz memos.

2008-10-08T20:18:00.004-05:00

Hope you like the new look. I decided to change the blog format after realizing that I had the same format as Alan Mutter's Newsosaur blog. And that was a bit too curmudgeonly for my tastes.

Speaking of new looks, gotta give Beachwood Reporter's Steve Rhodes props for his honest assessment of the newly designed Tribune. Like Steve, I also tried to hate it, but just couldn't (well, except for the "mall map" on top of select pages telling you where you are).

As I've said before, it's a bold step for the Tribune at a time when too many papers are being less than bold. Sure they'll lose traditional readers ... like Mr. Mutter and his friends ... but if they can pick up the maturing RedEye readers, then the gamble will surely pay off.

2008-10-07T20:17:00.006-05:00

Much off-topic today:

As a White Sox fan, I was happy with my team's performance in this year's playoffs. They really didn't belong in the playoffs, but there they were. And they went down fighting to the younger and faster Tampa Bay Rays.

But my fellow Cubs fans had a team that should have, by all means, been in this year's World Series. They sailed their way into the playoffs, then immediately sank. Now you'd think the average Cubs fan would be used to this. After all, for the past century fans simply shrugged their shoulders and sighed "wain until next year."

But this year's team made believers out of the most hardened Cubs hater. So when the Cubs fell flat on their respective faces in the playoffs, It hurt AND embarrassed Cubs nation even more.

As a result, I've noticed they're not shrugging shoulders any more.

They're angry...very angry...

...and bitter...very bitter...

...and they want someone to pay.

Frankly, I don't think it's the team that is the cause of this playoff impotence. My belief is that the team is carrying 100 years of curses, Cubbie occurrences, ghosts of great plays, players and goats of the past, excitable fans with Walkmans, etc. That's a massive load to have on your shoulders.

If they Cubs want to go to the World Series, they should unload the very core of all that tradition-laced fear and angst.

Wrigley Field.

It must go.

The Cubs must leave Wrigley Field. The sooner the better. Like the house in Amityville, Wrigley has spirits lurking through it that infect the team and fans, causing them to choke in the clutch. The Cubs must get out. Now.

Once the Cubs find a new home ... and I'm sure there would be a suburb willing to host them ... fans should circle the park and, like a Cubbie coven, burn the structure to the ground releasing the woeful spirits from Buckner and Bartman to the night sky.

OK, so a ritual burning may not necessarily be allowed under Chicago building codes. But the park could be leased to one of the many nearby universities as a ballpark for their team. Let them deal with the spirits.

In the meantime, the Cubs can start anew. A new field, a new home, a new lease on life.

It took the Florida Marlins only 6 years to go from nobody to Series crown. It could work for the "new" Cubs as well.

2008-09-29T14:19:00.002-05:00

* The Chicago Tribune new redesign debuted to day to a chorus of brickbats. Yes, it's not your mother's Tribune. Lots of huge photos, hundreds of cutouts and kitchy gimmicks (The "mall map" at the top of each page that tells you what page you're on, is really a hoot. With respect to comedian Jim Gaffigan, just how drunk do you have to be to not know what newspaper page you're on?).

But, once you get past the flash and glamor, there is substance. Lots of it. And it's interesting and useful.

The Tribune came out of the gate with a strong gallop. If it can maintain this pace with "the Midwest's largest reporting team," it just may have something. Something the competition should be concerned about.

* Given the reaction of Congress with the financial institutions, could it be possible that the news industry could also receive a bailout from the government? Would the government be willing to loan money to an industry that has been the watchdog, uncovering corruption and abuse of power for more than 2 centuries?

Obviously, government leaders would probably be happy to see the mainstream media fade away into oblivion. But, if that happens, who would our lawmakers blame for their abuse of the public trust?

2008-09-23T11:56:00.004-05:00

The Chicago Tribune gave the world a peek at its anticipated redesign Monday, and almost immediately the darts started flying from Tribune readers and media pundits alike. The large photos, cutouts and graphics were too much like USA Today, too busy, too shallow, too much like RedEye.

Too much like RedEye? Well, isn't capturing young readers what it's all about?

Instead of hearing from the grizzled pundits who long for the days of the "bigger, fresher, 24-hour Tribune," I (and the Trib's management, as well) would rather hear from the folks who made RedEye a viable tabloid in the city. If there are as many of them who look at the new Trib and go "hmmmmmm...." as there are current readers that go "ewwwwww..," then I'd wager that this will not be the debacle that many are already predicting.

And that, my friends, is what taking a leap of faith is all about. Right or wrong, at least the Tribune Company is trying.

2008-09-17T19:22:00.006-05:00

I've been reading a lot why online revenues have stagnated in the past year. While the economy is certainly a prime factor, I really like consultant Mark Potts' theory that newspapers' web sites are ... well... too much like newspapers. Potts offers a good number of suggestions to clean up and focus newspaper sites.

But the biggest issue with newspaper web sites is that ... like their print counterparts .. are still a "one-size-fits-all" product. As a reader, I have to sort through the bag to find the information I want. Some web sites are easier to sift through than others, but I still spend time sifting.

Why haven't we looked at creating a customized web site that reflects the individual reader's interest and reading patterns ... sort of an electronic "zoning" of the web site, but drilling down much farther than print zoning could ever do.

Look at some of the great retail web sites out there. Amazon.com pioneered the ability to track customers to monitor where they go and what they buy. So when that customer comes back to the site and logs in, not only can they see what they've bought, but Amazon offers suggestions based on their previous purchases which may fit their lifestyles.

So, borrowing from Amazon's success, wouldn't be cool if, as a reader, I could log into my Daily Local News web site and get a home page that has headlines from my neighborhood, the presidential race, the White Sox, and media business news? Then, there would be a rail that "suggests" stories that would be of interest to me (based on my previous visits to the site). Plus, there would be a link to the non-registered users home page, just in case I'm curious of what I'm missing.

If the basis of a custom site was a ZIP code, that could be an opportunity for a small business to advertise on your site. The local pizza parlor who doesn't want to advertise on the web because the reach is too broad may consider buying if the ad goes only to readers in certain ZIP codes. And, you could sell it at a lower price to make it more attractive to the small advertiser.

When a paper zones in print, it usually creates a page template and swaps stories per zone. The same could be done online. Tagging could direct stories to where they are most pertinent, and a template could swap stories based on information gained when a reader registers, as well as tracking where the reader goes on the site. Frankly, the web template would not necessarily have to look like your home page. You'd just need to carry your brand on the page.

So why haven't more newspaper web sites tried being more like Amazon? I have a feeling that Potts' theory that publishers aren't keen on real innovation is not that far off the mark.

But, oh, what a way to tell your readers what we're doing is all about you!

Hey, Lee Abrams, ARE YOU LISTENING?

2008-09-16T19:59:00.007-05:00

I often wonder why newspapers web sites don't aggregate more. Oh, yeah, now I remember ... they are afraid of losing readers to the links they'd send them to.

This proprietary thinking, however, carries less weight as readers and advertisers continue to leave. And as newsrooms become leaner and resources become scarce, it only makes more sense to help fill readers' needs to provide content from outside your walls as well as inside. Consider, for example, that we already provide links away to wire services such as AP and Bloomberg. Well, newspaper pay for that, so they have no problem. But as long as Google and Yahoo are getting away with it, why can't those of us who are still producing original content also fill gaps from elsewhere...even your competition?

Consider two things:

1. More studies are showing that readers do not go away when you link away from your site. Publishing 2.0 recently pointed out that aggregate sites like the Drudge Report have more readers and keep them longer than traditional news web sites.

2. Newspaper publishers, editors and reporters have been using an excellent example of news aggregators for years...and I'll bet they didn't even realize it. Jim Romenesko has been providing a media blog for the Poynter Institute for almost 10 years. Romenesko rarely has original content and links directly to the source of his stories every day. And every day, thousands in the business (and outside as well) come to his site to get a comprehensive snapshot of the media scene.

Now, as a reader of Romenesko, ask yourself: "How many times have I left his site to read a story, and didn't come back?" If you're like me, the answer is "never."

So, in a sense, why can't newspaper web sites be more like Romenesko? Newspapers still have the advantage of creating original content. But for the new media world, you should focus your resources on content you do best -- in most cases, that is local news. Blanket your existing resources on that.

In the areas outside your practical realm, rely on aggregation. Even if it's a competitor. As long as you can give your readers what they want, when they want it, they will care less where it came from. But they will rely on you to bring it to them.

Drudge is learning that; so is Arianna Huffington. It's time we all got on the bandwagon. Remember...in the new media world, your enemies will become your allies.

2008-09-11T13:44:00.004-05:00

Combined sections, smaller newsholes...how can a newspaper remain viable when there is less space and fewer resources?

The trick is to let go of the notion that every edition has to be all things to all people. Maybe it's time for newspapers to adopt a magazine approach to presenting its news.

Here's how to make the best of less:

1. Cover story: Instead of 20 people writing 20 stories that are 20 inches long, focus on one or two stories a day that will be your "cover story." It's easy when you have breaking news, but also enterprise a daily feature that anchors the front page and is the main entry point into the paper. Depending on the story, some days it could take up the entire page. But this is where the focus of resources should go, in telling the story traditionally through an in-depth piece, as well as supporting stories and graphic elements. USA Today created the idea for newspaper almost 30 years ago. It makes even more sense today.

2. Digests: Do you really need 10+ inches on every government meeting? Hit the high points, keep the facts up front and the quotes to a minimum. If it's a budget story, save the official-speak and just say what the major earmarks are and how readers will be affected by the increase/decrease.

3. Beyond words: Look at how the story is best told. Can it be better said in a picture or two? How about a graphic? A list? An alternative story form? A haiku (no kidding!)? Something short and sweet to help readers get the main points quickly.

4. Bullet points: Again, short and to the point. The town's new road project? Bullet point the total cost and what roads are affected. A controversial tax district to pay for facade improvements? Bullet point the facts, the cost, a brief synopsis of both sides. Save the mayor's comments for the city's web site.

5. Bring on other resources: If you still can't get it into the paper, tell people where they can get more. Utilize your web site to be a resources (not a repository of the 20-inch version of the story you couldn't get into print). Set up a page for a controversial issue, where you can place statements from all sides, supporting documents and links to supporting websites Or direct your print readers directly to the supporting sites. The more you help them get the information, the more they'll come back to you to begin their search the next time.

There are more ideas floating out there that I'd love to hear about. The bottom line is that newspapers should not just consider the bottom line as they cut back on newsprint. They should be looking at how to best continue the mission with less.

It can be done.

2008-09-09T13:28:00.007-05:00

I've been in a recent comment debate with Bill Lueders, news editor at the Isthmus in Madison, Wis., over remarks he recently made to a local business group. And while I certainly agree with his conclusion -- "Read the Newspaper." -- I was taken aback by his stance that all the reasons readers say they don't read a newspaper is not convincing ... therefore, readers need to change their habits and read newspapers.

That is equivalent to GM saying "All the reasons you're not buying SUVs anymore is wrong, so change your habits and buy a Hummer."

While Bill's intentions are honorable, he severely misses the point. Newspapers serve a purpose and function to the community. But newspapers are also a business and need to have a customer base and, in turn, make money. Changing a newspaper's shape,content or even delivery method is not necessarily pandering to the marketing gurus. Readers' needs and demands have changed over the past several decades. I'm a journalist, but I'm also a husband and father raising two very active children. I barely have time to sit down and fully digest my own newspaper, and barely scratch the surface of the second paper delivered to my home. And I find myself no different than my non-journalistic neighbors who are up before dawn and in bed past midnight every day.

While we have been offering the same menu over the past 100 years, local cable, CNN, free weeklies and the Internet have come along to offer alternative news packages. In addition, wireless networks, Google News, RSS feeds, smart phones and ... soon ... electronic readers will offer delivery methods that will better fit a reader's cramped lifestyle.

Oh yes, readers may change their habits, but I doubt they will come back to the old newspaper when they can get news off their iPhones through a personalized news feed.

Bill (as well as Jim Russell, who thought I was behind the times with a blog post several months ago) should read Rick Edmond's recent Poynter blog post. Newspapers are the Bennigans of the industry. We lost our customers years ago and need to figure out who they are and what they want, then develop a news package that not only meets the core values of great journalism, but also meet the demands of our customers.

If not, they'll simply go somewhere else.

2008-09-08T13:49:00.003-05:00

The New York Times has announced that it is going to reduce the number of sections of its newspaper to three.

Me thinks the announcement will soon be met with confirmations from other papers like the Chicago Tribune and Tampa Tribune.

And, I'd wager that this was a strictly business decision without involvement of editorial leaders. And if it is, that means the NYT and others will have lost another great opportunity to redefine its news package in order to provide great journalism in a smaller product, instead of the same-old stuffed into a smaller bag.

What a shame if that is the case.

2008-09-05T12:21:00.003-05:00

Need more proof that newspapers are recognizing they need to be "snack," and no longer a "three-course meal" to readers? Consider this:

* The Tampa Tribune is looking at publishing a one-section paper on weekdays, according to St. Pete Times media critic Eric Deggans.

* The Sun-Times reporters rumors of a 3-section Chicago Tribune when the redesigned paper hits the street later this month.

The reasons stress saving money on newsprint, which is certainly valid. But, will this make the Tribunes less of a newspaper?

Not if they have looked closely at what modern readers want. As long as they provide a solid news report that can be read quickly, they will do OK.

Sure, these shifts will cause some readers to cancel their subscriptions. Remember, our new and potential readers are no longer willing to sit down and spend a lot of time with our products, We should accommodate them with something they find still find compelling and useful, but also quicker to use.

2008-08-29T12:53:00.006-05:00

Today's flotsam:

* Three newspapers in Florida are going to test the waters in content sharing. What makes it unique is that none of the three -- the Miami Herald, Ft. Lauderdale Sun-Sentinel and Palm Beach Post -- are owned by the same company, but all three compete in the same regional marketplace. The experiment will continue for three months and will be re-examined after that.

Remember these words: "Your enemies become your allies" in the new media world.

Someone is catching on.

*Crain's Chicago Business reports that the Chicago Tribune redesign will not look like the prototype leaked to Editor & Publisher earlier this week. Too bad, I thought it showed that those in power at the Trib had the guts to try something radical to attact a new breed of readers.

Let's hope that the redesign that debuts in late September will be as fresh and radical as the leaked prototype. The last thing the Trib needs is to apply fresh makup on a dying horse.

* A few readers have asked me why I haven't chimed in on the recent departure of Sun-Times sports columnist Jay Mariotti. My answer: Why should I waste my time?

2008-08-26T19:34:00.005-05:00

Editor & Publisher today posted on its site today what it calls a prototype of the Chicago Tribune's highly-awaited redesign. If the pictured front page is an indication of reality, it confirms my belief that the Trib plans to parlay the success of its youth-oriented RedEye into the flagship product.

If so, give Tribune execs credit for a gutsy move ... one that may pay off in the long run. When the pre-Zell Tribune created RedEye, the plan was to get young adults to read a paper that has interests them, with the hopes that they would migrate to the flagship paper. I'm guessing the current Trib brain trust is finding those RedEye readers ready to migrate are looking at the current Tribune and saying "no way."

What makes RedEye appealing is the format, a quick-read paper for the mobile generation who don't have time to sit and read a full newspaper. The Trib prototype picks up that essence, and though it may drastically change the depth of substance, the substance will appeal to those who are ready to move from sexy dress in the workplace to coping with the recession.

That, along with the appointment of RedEye editor Jane Hirt as the Trib's new managing editor, points toward an era of a "quick read" Tribune, aimed at the news grazers.

Whether this is a successful formula remains to be seen. But give the Tribune credit for having guts. We're surely not seeing enough of that in the industry right now.

2008-08-25T13:11:00.003-05:00

Maybe I need to rethink my analogy that blogging is "the CB radio of the new millennium."

At least I can take comfort in knowing that if the newspaper industry does indeed die a painful death, I can still fall back on my old college job as a salesman at RadioShack.

2008-08-21T13:57:00.006-05:00

Boy, if this doesn't prove my point yesterday, then we're really out of it. The Tribune names Red Eye editor Jane Hirt as managing editor.

The cynics look for a dumbed-down Tribune with a lot of fluff and little depth. I say editor Gerry Kern recognizes where his audience is going, sees where his success stories and been, and is making moves to adapt the flagship to meet those new readers's needs.

I expect a news smorgasbord in the new Tribune, instead of the five-course dinner it's offering now. There will be authority and depth .. in keeping withn tradition ... but it'll most likely be sliced and diced into more digestible nuggets.

Perfect for grazing.

2008-08-20T20:07:00.004-05:00

It's nice to be proven right. A couple of months ago I wrote that we are becoming a nation of "news grazers," getting out information fix from here and there, but taking it in at our convenience throughout our very hectic days. This grazing has disrupted the newspaper experience, which requires you to stop, read and digest all at once.

Well, the folks at the Pew Research Center released a new report on changing habits of readers. Among the bullet points of the report (conveniently 'grazed' by Poynter's Amy Gahran) is that, indeed, news grazers have become the norm.

Now that we have officially recognize news grazing as the way new readers get their news, maybe those who have been in denial will finally realize they need to change the way we provide the news to them?

Google and Yahoo have recognized it for years. Huffington Post is catching on quick. If we, as those who actually produce content, don't reign back our territory, we'll be out of business.

Remember, news grazers don't care where the news source comes from. So, as a news producer, news organizations should decide what they do best and focus on that. What you can't do well, get from someone else, even if it's your competition.

News grazers like the convenience. If we figure out a way to provide a premium experience, we may even be able to make some money off of it, either through a subscription service or advertiser support.

OK, I see you moving on to something else, so I'll stop.

2008-08-18T22:21:00.011-05:00

I'd be remiss if I didn't acknowledge the 40 people who were involuntarily let go at the Chicago Tribune last Friday. Among the staffers let go, according to Michael Miner's blog, were veteran copy editor Charlie Dickenson and writer/editor Pat Kampert.

I know them both and, frankly, it's a big loss. Both are very talented writers and copy editors (and in Charlie's case, an accomplished author). Their talents, combined with the talents of the others let go, will be nearly impossible to replicate.

Yes, the business needs to change and become leaner. But I worry that we're losing the very knowledge base that give our newspapers the credibility our readers demand.

UPDATE: The Rockford Register-Star lays of 13 staffers and closes its Springfield bureau. I assume they will expect the Springfield Journal-Register, a fellow GateHouse Media newspaper, to help pick up the loss of state legislature news.

For the big picture on newspaper losses, check out Erica Smith's pretty comprehensive Paper Cuts blog.

2008-08-14T19:03:00.008-05:00

Today's flotsam:

*Thursday's Tribune Metro section led with a staff-produced story about how people in the Chicago exurb of Harvard have coped after Motorola closed up its massive cell phone plant five years ago, thereby eliminating the town's largest employer and road to prosperity.

On Page 5, a full-page ad placed by Harvard's economic group touts the benefits of bringing your business to the town.

An uncanny coincidence brought about by the wall separating editorial and advertising, or the Tribune's new premium ad policy (place a full-page ad, and we'll focus a news section on your issues)?

With public editor Tim McNulty gone, I guess we'll never get an answer.

But for REAL coincidence, Motorola announced the same day they're selling the Harvard building to another company (or do we have a real conspiracy working here?)

*The Huffington Post debuted its Chicago "local" edition today. My first thought is why would anyone want to open a new venture in a market that is over saturated with media?

But after looking over it, I have to give Adrianna credit for doing her homework. HuffPo Chicago is by no means the "hyperlocal" product that the metro area could really use, but it IS a one-stop shop for city news. I could do without John Cusack's pining for the city life, but the selection of stories from the city's metros was well-done, and the "quick read" feature is great.

It takes the Trib's Daywatch compilation one ... no, make that about four ... steps further. And I predict HuffPo Chicago will become a force to reckon with.

2008-08-13T21:09:00.004-05:00

Back in May, I wrote that newspapers need to befriend their enemies in order to survive. Basically, when news and information is your main product, you should be able to deliver what the customer wants, regardless of the source. If you deliver a product that has stories from, say, the New York Times, your readers won't leave you for the NYT. In fact, they'll appreciate that your product is giving them what they want without going to all these sites themselves. If you do this well enough, your readers will stay with you.

Call it the Google News effect.

I'm glad to see the Chicago Tribune is catching on. Mike Miner's blog reports that the Trib's morning e-mail blast, Daywatch, is beginning to link to stories in the Trib's competition, the Sun-Times. Give Daywatch editor Charlie Myerson credit for "sweetening" the offerings, although the Trib's innovation guy seems to take credit for it. But, nonetheless, this would never have happened under the old Tribune regime.

This will further the success of Daywatch, especially if they expand their offerings to suburban newspapers and business journals, such as Crain's Chicago Business. The only concern at this point is that there is no plans to make it a premium for Tribune or chicagotribune.com subscribers.

It'd be a shame if a great innovation dies because a revenue model wasn't considered for it.

2008-08-11T12:23:00.006-05:00

Obi-Wan Kenobe summed it up best after the planet Alderaan was destroyed by the Death Star: "I feel a great disturbance in the force."

That's how I felt Friday upon hearing words of the latest rounds of buyouts to hit the industry. At the Chicago Tribune, the axe began to fall for 80 newsroom employees, including managing editor for news Hanke Gratteau, Washington bureau chief Michael Tackett and public editor Tim McNulty (who, ironically, was the first reporter in the Trib's Beijing bureau and left on the opening day of the Beijing Olympics). Although these are high profile people leaving the paper, the cuts go much deeper, including a number of veteran reporters, editors and photographers (a list is at the end of this link), like Ed Sherman, Skip Mylinski, Charles Osgood, Maria Mooshil, Barbara Rose. These folks were writers, photographers and editors who also gave the Tribune a sense of personality, something it desperately lacked several years ago.

Then, on top of that, I learn that the Detroit Free Press's Joe Grimm has also agreed to a buyout there. There are hundreds of young journalists out there that owe their jobs to Joe and the help he has provided over the years. A real believer in recruiting and coaching, his was in essence a pioneer for the development of minority recruiting and talent development.

That's an awful lot of talent and institutional knowledge lost in one day. And while I can understand the economic needs for such action, I can't help but wonder if newspapers will be better because of it.

There has been a great disturbance in the force. We can only hope it hasn't irreparably damaged the institution.

UPDATE: Some pretty sobering numbers from Mark Potts and Erica Smith. Dark days indeed

2008-08-07T19:16:00.007-05:00

About 30 years ago, the writers at National Lampoon produced a wonderful parody of the local Sunday newspaper. The paper, called the Dacron, Ohio Republican-Democrat, featured a main story about 2 Dacron women who were missing while taking a once-in-a-lifetime vacation in Japan. At the end of a long, long story, the writer notes Japan was destroyed by a natural disaster.

That over-the-top local treatment was funny 30 years ago, but was NatLamp spot on for what newspapers will become in another 10 years?

I ask this after reading Tuskegee News publisher Paul Davis' column "Community newspapers doing nicely" I don't know Davis, but after reading this, I love him. I can just imagine him sitting at his desk in his storefront office across the street from the Coast to Coast store, typing away on his Underwood to get this out on time.

OK, a bit of an exaggeration. But he does make a point. We focus too much on the dire state of the newspaper industry, but we talk mainly of the major metros and the companies that owns hundreds of smaller newspapers. However, in the small towns throughout the country, many of these newspapers are indeed holding their own.

Now I admire Davis for taking the high road, that the mission to readers and advertisers remains intact. And there is a lot of truth to that. In a community where everyone knows everyone else, you don't want to upset your customer base. But you can't say the Philadelphia Inquirer or Minneapolis Post-Tribune doesn't have that same mission, so what sets them apart from Paul Davis in Tuskegee?

Simple ... Tuskegee owns its market. The majority of these community papers are the only source of local news and information. Folks in these towns are most likely finding out about the world from some other source, but if they need to find out about the fire down the street, or where they can get a deal on an oil change, they run to the News.

And local is where the majority of newspapers will need to go to survive. As technology continues to improve our ability to gather and read news from around the world, only a few media sources will shake out as the source for world and national news .. sources like the New York Times, Washington Post, CNN, BBC, ITN. That will force the metros to redefine themselves. The Tribunes, Heralds, and Newses will need to look at becoming the local source, which will be difficult because a number of good suburban newspapers and alt weeklies have been establishing that local market for years.

So small community papers are in the catbird seat, so to say. But I hope Paul Davis won't sit back in his wooden desk chair and gloat. Small papers need to develop and adapt to new readers and their needs. In addition to improving websites, they need to create local databases that will provide readers with instant information. They need to create online communities to spark and maintain debate and dialog.

I recently had an e-mail exchange with the publisher of a small Michigan paper who was nice enough to show me his redesigned newsroom flowchart. I was impressed because it addressed the same issues that the metros are facing, but it was targeted to address his community. Here's someone who's looking ahead ... and working to own his community.

The mission doesn't change. It's how we accomplish that mission does.

2008-08-06T14:23:00.006-05:00

Now here's a positive turn...Chris O'Brien lists 5 ways to foster innovation in the newsroom. These are not original ideas, but here's someone offering an idea (or 5) to make newspapers and journalism better and stronger for the future. A nice relief from the whining I mentioned earlier.

The key in O'Brien's piece is that newspapers must dedicate a number of staff to innovation -- not just for the present, but also the future. Innovation must be ongoing. Change is inevitable. The business community has recognized it for much longer than we have.

We constantly editorialize for change, but as a business we are the most reluctant to do so. Unfortunately, most newspapers today are so focused on trying to plug holes in the profit dike that they are neglecting to fix it ... and make it stronger. If Microsoft operated like newspapers, I'd still be using Windows 3.1 to put this blog out, and Bill Gates would have his staff focused on fixing all the bugs still in it.

Yes, it's going to hurt. And, yes, some journalistic integrity may be lost in the transition, but until we as an industry focus some of our effort into research and development, we are destined to die.

And frankly, it'll be our own fault.