The Future of Journalism

Great questions about the "S"-word (Scandal!)

2006-04-19T15:15:00.000-07:00

Skip Foster, writing for Everyday Ethics on the Poynter site, deconstructs an AP lead about the recent situation at Duke University involving allegations of rape by a stripper at a party hosted by the lacrosse team. Foster asks the right questions about how journalists frame stories, and how we use loaded words inappropriately in our articles. It's worth a read and discussion.

What do we expect from gossip columnists?

2006-04-12T11:44:00.000-07:00

The current turmoil over charges that gossip columnists at the New York Post not only accepted lots of expensive freebies from sources, but that one allegedly attempted to bribe sources, is creating a maelstrom of comment and disgust among journalists. (See this New York Daily News article.) The controversy leads to the inevitable question of whether the same ethical standards we expect from journalists should be applied to gossip columnists. That's the subject of discussion in the pages of the Poynter Institute's ethics columns this week. The question is a good one: do we expect that the "news" we receive about celebrities is really true? Do we expect that the people who bring us this "news" can be free to accept trips, parties and other favors from the celebrities or the PR people who run their clients' lives? What do you think?

Katie and Meredith

2006-04-07T13:59:00.000-07:00

What changes are in store for the CBS Evening News after the announcement that Katie Couric has agreed to follow in the legacy of Murrow and Cronkite by anchoring the national newscast? Couric brings a different style--warmer, yet every bit as professional. In an era of personal celebrity journalism, she is a good choice to try to boost ratings and that is what counts the most these days to corporate executives. Hopefully her stint as a serious reporter will help her find a balance between the human touch she exhibited on the Today show and the more staid and stoic approach we expect from serious network news anchors.

An interesting element of both the Couric and Vierra "stories" are the public struggles of their spouses and the tragic and heroic personal lives they have led. This human quality of both women should serve to bond them to viewers and perhaps increase viewers for both their shows.

Will the civic life of America be better served by the information they provide us and the influence they may wield over serious news-gathering and reporting efforts in TV? I'm certainly willing to give them a chance.

[BTW--Jeff Bliss of the Hoover Institute is reporting that Pepperdine alumnae Nicolla Hewitt, a Today show producer, is moving to CBS with Couric.]

Take Your Laptop With You to the "Reading Room"

2006-04-07T13:56:00.000-07:00

Today's post is courtesy of Audrey Reed, editor of Pepperdine's weekly newspaper, Graphic.

The New York Times changed its Web site on April 3, and the resulting product is much more reader friendly. As Slate writer Jack Shafer said (http://www.slate.com/id/2139278/), he's cancelling his subscription to the New York Times print edition, and saving the 600+ bucks his subscription costs. He advises others to do the same, and with the money saved people should buy a larger monitor.

The Times is arguably the county's leading newspaper, so when they do something, the entire field takes note. I suppose we, as "print"
journalists, should be getting used to hearing these sort of comments from Web-savvy readers, and begin to think more like the Star in terms of how we present our stories. (Remember, Gretchen Macchiarella. of the Ventura Star said that the Stars’ stories are moving toward first being published on the Web and then in print.)

I think it'll be interesting to see which school of advertising thought will prevail. On one hand, there's the idea that plopping ads on the site and having no subscription fees will produce higher profits. The other side is to have a subscription fee (which also requires a login), but then there's no to little advertising. I'm rooting for the free access with ads, even though that means I'll be subjecting myself to blatant and non-so blatant advertising. I think when it comes down to it, having to remember one more password and user name combination and logging in to one more site will eventually turn away people.

And then there's the issue of what to read in the bathroom now that Web sites are picking up steam ... Call me old fashioned but, I think I will always find laptop use in the restroom gross.
--
Audrey E. Reed
Editor in Chief, the Graphic
Freelance Writer
c. 310.498.1077
o. 310.506.4314
http://audrey.e.reed.googlepages.com

Kill Objectivity?

2006-03-31T12:46:00.000-08:00

Michael Kinsley, writing in Slate, says it's time to kill the notion of objectivity. Kinsley calls objectivity "less an ideal than a conceit." The former (and short-lived) editor of the editorial pages of the L.A. Times makes an interesting argument worth debating. One hopes he is dead wrong! (Thanks to Romanesko for the post.)

Future of Journalism panel discussion

2006-03-31T12:41:00.000-08:00

Here's the link to an interesting panel discussion recently in San Jose. With the Mercury News' future up in the air, it's a good place for those who care about the paper, and about digital "journalism," to provide us with some insights. Happy reading.

A strength like no other

2006-03-21T13:23:00.000-08:00

In a post today on the Poynter Institute website, Northeastern University prof Bill Kirtz interviews winners of Harvard's Goldsmith Prize for Investigative Reporting. The gist of his interviews is that award winners are all dedicated to the proposition that newspapers are best situated to succeed in the niche arena of investigative reporting. "If papers are going to survive, we must provide readers with these services," says Jack Leonard of the Los Angeles Times.

At papers where this year's winners work, reporters are encouraged and supported as they undertake the time-consuming (and therefore expensive) grunt work necessary to ferret out information we need to function as a civil and free society. As Susan Schmidt of the Washington Post remarks: We can do it. Bloggers can't. That's our franchise." Her colleague, Jeffrey Smith adds, "If we concentrate on investigative reporting, we can make a difference and distinguish ourselves from everything available on the Web. We're very slow as an institution to realize that we can't just write what happened. We have to tell them what they can't get in any other media."

A Voice of Hope

2006-03-16T16:11:00.000-08:00

According to McClatchy Company CEO Gary Pruitt, “newspapers are still among the best media businesses—and the most important.” In his op-ed piece on the Wall Street Journal today (students can access it through FACTIVA), Pruitt lays out the counter-argument to the wail of voices predicting the demise of newspapers. He notes most newspaper companies are still profitable, even though circulation and advertising has slipped. Still, he asserts, newspapers are holding onto their audiences well in the face of a proliferation of TV outlets, new magazines, and certainly more web sites. He also cites surveys showing readership of newspapers hovering around 50 percent of the adult population. Pruitt’s main contribution to our understanding of the future of journalism, and the main reason his company paid $6.5 billion for Knight Ridder, is the belief that the traditional newspaper is at the top of a pyramid of media sites disseminating information. “Replacing the notion of ‘readers’ with ‘audiences,’ we’re fast becoming multi-platform, 24/7 news companies—and it’s working,” he says. Most important to this journalism professor’s ear, Pruitt reinforces his belief that a strong journalistic enterprise is necessary for the survival of self-government and democracy. That’s an important role, he notes, as democracy undergoes attack from “spinmeisters, partisans and ideologues.”

A victory for newspapers?

2006-03-14T12:00:00.000-08:00

Today there are lots of people talking about McClatchy’s $4.5 billion offer to purchase Knight Ridder. The buzz concerns McClatchy’s intention to sell Knight Ridder’s higher profile papers such as the San Jose Mercury News and the Philadelphia Inquirer. These papers, according to McClatchy CEO Gary Pruitt, aren’t in communities where the growth rate of the population, and hence the circulation and advertising base, is sufficient enough to justify keeping the papers. There’s a fair bit of agreement that McClatchy is a newspaper-focused company committed to the future of journalism, not a company that dances to the tune of short-term Wall Street analysts. Still, the man who some say forced Knight Ridder’s sale, hedge fund guru Bruce S. Sherman, also owns a stake of McClatchy, and the sale of some of the papers troubles journalistic purists. Potential buyers for the Knight Ridder castoffs include William Dean Singleton, whose Media News company owns a string of papers in California, Colorado and elsewhere. Stay tuned.

2006 State of American Journalism report

2006-03-13T16:06:00.000-08:00

The 2006 annual report on the State of the News Media is out, and available on the web. The massive effort of the Project for Excellence in Journalism summarizes a variety of data about the future of journalism, a timely subject given today’s announcement of McClatchy’s approximately $4.5 billion offer to purchase Knight Ridder.

The report concludes that the end of journalism is not here. “But we do see a seismic transformation in what and how people learn about the world around them.” Blogging and other citizen information efforts are on the rise. “Power is moving away from journalists as gatekeepers over what the public knows,” and audiences are still leaving newspapers and television for online media. Thus journalists are going to need to redefine how they do what they do, and how their skill set can best serve society, while still making a profit for their owners.

The major trends, according to the report, are:

1. Journalism has more outlets but is covering fewer stories. One stop sources for all news is a thing of the past.

2. Big city newspapers are the most threatened species of newspaper.

3. Idealists who believe in journalism as part of the public trust are toast—the accountants rule.

4. Traditional media are moving toward technological innovation, but it is a slow process.

5. The media upstarts, Yahoo and Google, may also be facing economic change as news gatherers may demand payment from outlets like Google News.

6. While online journalism is growing, its economic viability is still a long ways off.

The good news is that the American public still think the press is professional and moral, “and the vast majority of Americans continue to support the idea that the press should be a neutral judge.”

Double standards?

2006-03-09T11:50:00.000-08:00

Gene Maddaus, a staff writer for the Pasadena Star-News, makes a simple, yet profound suggestion to KTLA television in Los Angeles. It's this: Admit that your claim to be a morning news show is a fraud and simply call yourself the "KTLA Morning Show."

Maddaus' suggestion comes as the station and journalism ethicists discuss the fact that the morning show's hosts received comp rooms and other amenities at the newly remodeled Ritz-Carlton, Huntington Hotel in Pasadena. After enjoying the amenities, the morning show broadcast from the Pasadena area, extolling the virtues of the hotel and what it offered potential guests. As the issue heated up on the pages of the Star-News and the Los Angeles Times, it was also revealed that one of the anchors received a $10,000 dining room makeover free from a furniture company owner seeking positive coverage. The story never ran, and Allen Smith, the furniture company owner, wants to be paid.

Most of us don't get too upset these days to hear about these conflicts of interest among celebrity-seeking television personalities. Sadly, we expect it. But the real issue here is the double standard: at this point KTLA's owner, the Chicago-based Tribune Company, has been silent on this faux pas, even though it presents a clear violation of the company's journalistic code of ethics. Certainly if reporters from the Tribune-owned L.A. Times attempted to mislead the public, there would be you-know-what to pay. In fact the last time, L.A. Times employees tried to pull the wool over readers' eyes--the sad Staples advertising affair--people lost their jobs and the Chandler family lost its courage and sold the paper to the out-of-towners. Certainly there has been some discussion between Chicago and KTLA, one hopes at least!

Meanwhile, let's see if KTLA gets ethics and changes the name of its morning show. Don't hold your breath!

Here's more on the story from L.A. Observed.

Did we write that??

2005-12-14T19:36:00.000-08:00

Jeff Bliss of the Hoover Institution passes on two interesting websites that speak to media practices. Regret the Error.org is a great site for reading serious and humorous retractions and corrections contained in newspapers and magazines. Some of the more serious mistakes have cost people their lives, like the recent Newsweek story claiming some interrogators of people captured during fighting in Afganistan and Iraq flushed the Koran down a toilet. The magazine had to retract the statement when confirmation of the allegation could not be obtained. Several people in the Middle East lost their lives in riots that broke out after the allegations swept through the region.

Bliss also passes on an ombundsman piece about the sources National Public Radio relies on when reporting on serious policy issues. It turns out more "experts" from the right--like the Hoover Institution--are interviewed than those from the left (a situation which no doubt helps Bliss' job security!).

Want My Opinion? Let me pass the hat first. . .

2005-12-01T16:06:00.000-08:00

Investor’s Business Daily (subscription required) reports on the two-month old experiment by the New York Times in which internet viewers must pay to access the paper’s Op-Ed columnists. The imposition of a $7.95 a month fee includes access to the paper’s eight Op-Ed columnists and 14 other opinion writers. The Times’ move is an effort to recoup cash from formerly free internet content. “We created a large user base in less than 60 days with people willing to pay a significant price,” Times president and general manager Scott Heekin-Canedy told IBD. The article quotes one internet research analyst, Barry Parr of Jupiter Research, as saying: “Putting those columnists behind a subscription barrier is going to decrease the NYT’s influence and diminish its brand. Maureeen Dowd available anywhere on the Net is more powerful than Maureen Dowd behind a paid subscription a year.” Obviously in this experiment the NYT is putting a need for profit above the potential influence of its top opinion writers. It’s likely, though, that political and business leaders the Times hopes to influence already pay for a print subscription, or receive daily digests of the paper’s opinions. It’s those of us from outside New York who want to learn good writing from some of the best who will suffer the most. As Doug Tsuruoka of IBD notes, "The question for the New York Times is whether enough people will find its columnists compelling--and if that revenue is worth any resulting decline in influence."

What journalism could be

2005-11-30T10:23:00.000-08:00

Brent Cunningham, writing in a recent issue of Columbia Journalism Review, gives us a well-thought out analysis of where current news media have fallen short, while showing what the profession could do to better serve America. The article quotes extensively from Pepperdine religion professor Richard Hughes, author of Myths America Lives By, a very thoughtful and provocative explanation of the larger narrative visions politicians evoke, and news media mindlessly reproduce, because these myths are so deeply embedded in the American cultural psyche.

More on classifieds

2005-11-29T09:53:00.000-08:00

A report from the Pew Internet & American Life Projects reports that 27 million internet users are selling something online. Craigslist.org tops the list of online classified ad usage. The report also notes that internet classified traffic is up 80 percent the past year. Seventeen percent of people in Gen Y (ages 18 to 28) are selling something, while 26 percent of older adults (ages 29 to 40) are hawking something online. This is a study that provides more data to the fears of newspaper executives watching their cash cow of classifieds ads migrate to the internet.

It's the ads!!

2005-11-26T11:26:00.000-08:00

John Ellis, a venture capital executive formerly with the Boston Globe, writes in the Wall Street Journal (subscription required) that “Knight Ridder has been publishing mostly second-rate newspapers for as long as anyone can remember.” He says the company’s strategy has been to offer mediocre content while leveraging its hold on classified advertising, the real money maker for newspapers. With the advent of new technologies to deliver ads (from the internet to E-Bay to Craigslist and others), the need for newspapers to deliver customers is diminishing. It is looking ahead to the demise of classified and space ads in newspapers that worries investors and futurists—some of whom have already declared that newspapers will cease to exist in the near future. He notes that newspaper chains had the opportunity to buy their new rivals, including Yahoo and Google, five years ago and passed. Now they may be looking to those companies, plus Microsoft, to bail them out in the future. Ironic, isn’t it?

$300 million profit?

2005-11-26T11:17:00.000-08:00

The Wall Street Journal (subscription required) reports in its Nov. 23 edition that one reason Bruce S. Sherman, chief executive of Legg Mason’s Private Capital Management LP wants Knight Ridder sold is to enhance profit performance by his firm. PCM owns 19 percent of Knight Ridder and recently urged the conglomerate's board to “aggressively pursue the competitive sale of the company.” If the targets are met, Sherman and his firm pocket $300 million. The Journal says, “Legg Mason. . . had agreed to make the $300 million payment to Mr. Sherman and other principles if PCM reaches certain growth targets by next Aug. 1” To reach those growth targets, PCM needs a big winner and evidently it decided that forcing the sale of Knight Ridder might help it get there. That helps explain the timing of PCM’s desire to cash out its stake. Those who would question the morality of putting $300 million in profit above the interests of citizens who rely on those papers for information will, of course, be accused of naivety for neglecting to consider the morality of honoring shareholders who own Knight Ridder and investors who gave money to PCM expecting a profit.

Encouraging numbers

2005-11-23T07:47:00.000-08:00

The Newspaper Association of America reports an increase in ad spending for newspapers and their affiliated websites. Individuals and companies spent nearly $12 billion on ads for the third quarter of 2005. That's a 2.4 percent increase over the same period last year. While only $518 million of the $12 billion was for online advertising, that figure represents a 27 percent jump from last year's third quarter. Classified advertising spending increased 5.5 percent. While these numbers are encouraging, the report noted that ads from national advertisers decreased 4.7 percent.

Are Washington journalists killing journalism?

2005-11-22T09:24:00.000-08:00

In Washington D.C., where all things political converge, a debate rages over journalistic practices of star journalists like Judith Miller of the New York Times and Bob Woodward of the Washington Post. A special prosecutor is trying to find out who in government leaked the name of Valerie Plume, a CIA employee, to the media. Already one indictment has been handed down. Was this leak a deliberate effort by the government to get back at her husband for his opposition to the war in Iraq? Inquiring minds want to know. Miller spent time in jail for refusing to reveal her source. Now, seemingly out of the blue, Woodward says he received the information about Plume before any of the other journalists did. What's the significance of this late breaking news from Woodward? Speculation abounds. Marty Kaplan, associate dean of the Annenberg School of Communication at USC, weighs in. It's worth a read. Note especially his appeal to today's journalism students. Learn well and help us out of these continual problems!

They still make money

2005-11-21T08:53:00.000-08:00

Make no mistake, most American newspapers are profitable. Even as the Los Angeles Times announced another round of news room layoffs (85 people or 8 percent of its staff), its carpetbagging parent—the (Chicago) Tribune Company—still makes more money than it spends each year. Because the conglomerate also owns television stations and entertainment properties (like the Chicago Cubs), losses in its newspapers can be offset, hence the company's continuing profit. But in 2004 newspapers earned more than 20 cents on the dollar, according to analyst John Morton, a much better showing than for most companies in the Standard and Poors 500 index. (A great explanation of newspaper profitability and its challenges can be found here.) The issue is future growth. Already, growth in profits has slowed to 3 percent a year, down from 5 percent in recent years. What troubles executives is the decline in readership, which causes advertiser flight to alternative sources. The internet is stealing ad revenue and the future looks bleak for newspapers.

To keep abreast of the Times' travails, check out L.A. Observed, the best site for news about Los Angeles media.

The Future of Journalism

2005-11-18T09:22:00.000-08:00

This is a blog dedicated to discussing the future of journalism.

Pundicts predict that newspapers are dying. Americans aren't reading them, preferring instead to get news from television or their favorite internet site. Traditional news media like newspapers, news magazines and even network TV, meanwhile, seem to suffer from a loss of trust and credibility with the public. Media conglomerates, rather than trying to reclaim the moral high ground by improving news coverage, dance on the marionette strings of Wall Street stock analysts. News budgets are cut to meet ever-increasing demands for larger corporate profits. None of us decry the right of shareholders to make a profit; but when that profit motive erodes the noble cause of promoting democracy, freedom and a safe future for our children by providing a fair account of the day's activities, both the shareholders and the American people suffer. Even as they cut their news gathering and dissemination staff, media conglomerates try to lure in readers and viewers with dumbed down presentations of issues. They reason it is preferable to entertain than help us understand nuances of those issues, the grey areas we really need to understand in order to make informed decisions about our leaders and our culture. What an insult, especially to young adults who media bosses feel are too self-possessed and I-Pod addicted to care what happens to the world they are inheriting!

Journalism not only suffers from this set of challenges, but from larger idological conflicts in society. Political conservatives decry the liberal bias of the press, a Godless drift toward moral chaos and, eventually, the demise of the American dream. Liberals fear a censorship and oppression of the religious right, depriving the country of the free discussion of issues, eventually leading to the imposition of a monarchy, dictatorship or theocracy. Those who promote dialogue, the search for common ground and mutual respect among all people, are all too often intimidated into silence or marginalized.

Still, there is hope. Each generation possesses unique gifts and motivations to make the world a better place for themselves and their children. This blog site is dedicated to that generation. Hopefully it can provide a place for a rational discussion of how people of good will can save the news business from itself, and return civil discourse and the search for truth into the fabric of the American experience.