As a reader
Good afternoon.
As I enter my second month as a “civilian” I find that my newspaper reading habits have really changed. This should come as no surprise as I’ve always accepted the notion that too much of our journalism is self-indulgent, boring or (in the Internet age) old. But it is one thing to understand the idea and another to experience the reality.
I find myself spending far less time with my morning newspapers than in the past. As a civilian, I find myself jumping through the A section in just a few minutes. Out of a newsroom and away from direct wire feeds to my computer, I go to the net to read national and international news. Yahoo has become an oft-visited site. It was never on my favorites list before. I also go regularly to CNN.com and its various branches.
By the time the paper arrives, there just isn’t anything in the national/international report that I haven’t already seen or heard.
And this isn’t just about my local paper. On the road the last couple of weeks, I had the same experience with the New York Times, several local papers and USA Today. Even that last paper’s A section, snappy and readable as it is, held less interest.
Of course, this problem has been noted endlessly by any number of people and organizations, particularly the online-only lobby.
But, still, for an editor, the experience is unsettling and a little sad.
Again referencing all of the papers I’ve read in the month since I left The Spokesman, I find I’m also reading less local news, really focusing on the few stories that haven’t already been posted or that carry bylines of journalists I really know and respect.
But I spend more time with features, entertainment and sports (not for news, but for depth) and with the local-local-local zoned sections of The Spokesman where reporters can still indulge their writing chops and focus on people rather than institutions.
But the fact is, if my several newspapers disappeared tomorrow, my life would go on, a bit emptier for the loss of routine and tactile experience, but no less informed.
Just to emphasize, this isn’t a new or original thought, not even close. But I’m a civilian now, so the actual experience is new to me.
What to do?
Back in a newsroom today, I’d fight even harder against the entrenched interests that continue to insist that the big national and international stories of today belong on Page 1 tomorrow “as a matter of record.”
And I’d fight harder to kill the stenographic meeting stories and the press release crap that makes up too much of what passes for local news in too many papers. As radical as I have been as an editor, I have not been radical enough.
If our newspapers can’t be timely, they should at least be interesting.
I know, all that has been said before. But now I’m just a reader and more than ever, I really believe it.
steve
Tags: editors, newspapers, readership
October 30th, 2008 at 3:22 pm
It made my day to find this blog. I just thought I’d let you know and encourage you to keep it up. From a former media guy who left for the private sector a short while back - I feel like the guy the just missed the sailing of the Titanic…
October 30th, 2008 at 7:43 pm
…all of which underscores the acute need to continually finesse and re-engineer news outlets’ Web sites for ease of reading, logical architecture, poignant visuals, audio and links. Hint, hint: Ryan, take it LIVE~
October 30th, 2008 at 9:30 pm
I agree on the national/international part. I personally could care less about sports, but I love the local stuff. I enjoy holding a newspaper and leafing through the local section. And especially the SR, where the letters section is just off the hook sometimes and always has lots of letters. Since 2004 when the SR endorsed Bush (again!!) I rarely-to-never read the editorials, unless it’s Sat and Gary Crooks (?) writes his smart bombs. The syndicated columnists appear to be the cheap ones b/c they’re not very smart or the least bit original. That said, I think I’ve seen Amy Goodman on there a couple times, which is always refreshing.
I love the Slice (which is also local) and it’s sort of fun to read the antics of the writers that submit stuff for the Religion page on Saturdays. Oh yeah, and the guilty pleasure is Carolyn Hax. The Ask Annie ones are just silly, Carolyn keeps it real.
Rich Landers and his stuff is great. I can’t believe he turns out the Outdoor section every week. He’s got the best job in the world.
I’ve thought of going online for the small amount of content that I do read, mainly for environmental reasons, but I just love reading the paper in the morning. Sitting in front of a screen for me is work, so my morning paper needs to be real. For now anyway.
Keep posting Steve. I had mixed feelings on how you ran the SR - especially around the West stuff and even more in the subsequent “investigation” or “audit” that followed, but I respect you and find your posts interesting.
October 31st, 2008 at 1:26 am
The tactile experience you mention is something I just love about reading a newspaper. Like you, Steve, that is something I will miss if it does disappear. I think newspapers will be around a decade from now but they will look different and serve a different purpose. I still love reading until my fingertips are soiled and slippery. That’s when I know I have read enough.
The rise of the blogosphere presents an interesting challenge to journalism. While opinions now dominate the cable news channels, the bloggers seem to be headed in the same direction, only quicker. Those that actually achieve respectability will be few and far between. Right now they tend to be lopsided in one political leaning or the other.
~
HuffPo=Liberal
D. Kos=Liberal
MDrudge=Conservative
FoxNews=Conservative
~
What I hope for is that a few large sites emerge from a good source like a newspaper. Then they have clear portals to whichever leaning you prefer. I like to read all opinions. I think the leadership will come from these;
-
1) New York Times-or-CNN (or both?)
2) Google
3) Yahoo
4) Washington Post
5) ?Newcomer?
-
….One or two locations where immediate news can be quickly summarized. Then quickly discussed for those who like to blog. The fascinating thing to me will be whether or not bloggers will have an impact greater than they already enjoy. Which is to say, will there be new journalists who emerge from the blogoshere that write in a more engaging and creative way…while also enlightening with high levels of credibilty and factual accounts. I hope so, but I do not see it happening soon. A gradual decay of true journalism is already happening. Books will always have their appeal. Why can this not also be true of newspapers? The easy answer is the immediacy of the internet. The real answer, however, is that we do not yet know what will happen. One thing is for sure. Many jobs will be lost as the continual downsizing devastates the newsrooms.
David Elton
Spokane, Wa.
October 31, 2008
October 31st, 2008 at 11:08 am
Al Jazeera English has a good take on the news as well… and of late Bloomberg’s Futures page gives an idea of what is happening in Asia tomorrow morning, as early as 8:00 PM here… if you have any interest in keeping your money in your retirement accounts up to speed… gus
Oh… Steve hope you read the Inlander thesed days…
October 31st, 2008 at 2:26 pm
I left newsrooms on my 20th anniversary last year and got into community college PR. I still read The Oregonian every day, but, like Steve, less for the national and international news. I drill through the Local section for news, then go online (Real Clear Politics, NY Times, the Portland Tribune and, oddly enough, al Jazeera.com) for national and international news. dana
November 4th, 2008 at 7:46 am
it’s al jazeera .net not com… j google “al jazeera english”
November 7th, 2008 at 12:34 pm
[...] instead of presiding over more newsroom cuts admits he’s getting most of his news these days online: “But the fact is, if my several newspapers disappeared tomorrow, my life would go on, a bit [...]