Skip to main content

As I said here, I like words, and I like information. While pictures and graphics can provide some level of information, I think solid reporting and well-crafted stories serve our communities the best. I think The New York Times' traditional design is a beautiful thing. Newspapers such as that offer less filler and are teeming with information. As such, I would probably fit perfectly well in some 18th century London coffeehouse or pub reading the latest edition of The Spectator. But then again, and for better or worse, I'm not the average Joe.

Print media, as is evidenced by the recent demise of the Rocky Mountain News, the Detroit Free Press scaling back to only three days per week, Knight Ridder's purchase by McClatchy, among others examples, print media is tanking. Perhaps sooner than later, the days of sitting in the local Huddle House or at your kitchen table reading the morning paper may be one and done. Today, at least among small to mid-size dailies, there's this dire atmosphere, almost like a desperation, to sell papers. I saw it at a local daily I used to work for. The leadership wanted giant photos, "teasers" everywhere, sports cut-outs ... basically as much crap as one could pile above the fold, the better, information and usefulness of such "elements" (as they called them) be damned. For a national example of this, see USA Today.

The problem with that model is that a publication could offer the most artistic, elegantly designed and well-photographed publication in the country, but if it missed the boat on content, it has failed in its duty to inform and educate the community it serves. After all, with all those "elements" flying around everywhere, something has to be compromised. And the content usually gets the ax, and at this aforementioned paper, that's exactly what happened. Thus — and I know to the budget-minded publisher or editor this is unpopular territory — but the public is shortchanged when elements take precedence over content. The job of newspapers is to add to the intelligence and knowledge of the public, not take away from it or contribute to the general dumbing down taking place in other outlets like radio and television. Have we lost our muster when we simply can't sell newspapers by compelling headlines and probing reporting? Have J-schools across the country failed us in producing a generation of editors and publishers who are OK with this nonsense? Can't we be everything television and radio isn't?

As an example, Stephen King's name doesn't jump out at you because he's got lots of cool pictures and graphics in his books. In fact, it's hard to find a single picture anywhere! His name jumps out at you because he does something with words and ideas that few others can. We are raising and educating a generation of journalism amateurs — or wimps — in this regard. What King does and what journalists do are polar, of course, but I'm arguing that words, in and of themselves, can be compelling and can make newspapers or books or whatever fly off the racks. Journalism is not for the bashful. True journalism doesn't hide behind snazzy graphics or photos. It can be powerful, and it can change communities. I've seen it happen. But I'm probably arguing in 20th century, or even 19th century, terms.

Here in the 21st century, the Internet provides a literal free for all of information, thus rendering newspapers largely irrelevant, except only to a select few still enamored with their morning coffee-paper routine. I'm in that crowd, but admittedly, we must move on. Insomuch as small- to medium-sized dailies are going to continue to offer their daily fare of elements, giant photos, graphics simply for the sake of graphics and cartoon-sized headlines, they should just fold up shop and put all that time and effort into the Internet, as witnessed by this publication.

Whoever created this is probably quite proud, but this is a newspaper, not a graphic showroom. And by the way, to further illustrate why this is trash, where is the local news on the front page? Can you find it? Clemson Tigers basketball is local, but that's sports. A local feature story about an artist is not local news. Photos and graphics have all but consumed this paper. I am sure local news in short supply can be found inside, but it should be found out front, and it's not. (The paper recently reformatted to this tabloid design.)

Almost all of this paper's readers — and millions more — are online, so why not scale back the effort, stop contributing to the trash heap and publish solid reporting and well-crafted writing on the Web site. And, the money saved from going virtual could be put into increased attempts to sell ad space on the Web through banners, specially-priced ads based on where they appear on the page, Web design, hosting and other ventures. In short, if the goal is to abandon the traditional model for newspapers as we know them, get on with the end game. Get completely virtual, stop publishing graphic-laden, information-less trash and give up the ghost. I'll never read books online and if there is still a local or national newspaper still putting out quality work in print form, chances are I'm going to read it. But thankfully, books still have a market in print form. Of the former newspapers, I'm not sure. We are too enamored with the sound bites of FOX News and CNBC and CNN to care about newspapers anymore. And that's fine. But it's time some papers stop pretending to be relevant, if that relevancy means compromising journalistic integrity to en masse photos and graphics signifying nothing.

Originally posted to Jeremy Styron on Mon Mar 16, 2009 at 10:11 PM PDT.

Your Email has been sent.
You must add at least one tag to this diary before publishing it.

Add keywords that describe this diary. Separate multiple keywords with commas.
Tagging tips - Search For Tags - Browse For Tags


More Tagging tips:

A tag is a way to search for this diary. If someone is searching for "Barack Obama," is this a diary they'd be trying to find?

Use a person's full name, without any title. Senator Obama may become President Obama, and Michelle Obama might run for office.

If your diary covers an election or elected official, use election tags, which are generally the state abbreviation followed by the office. CA-01 is the first district House seat. CA-Sen covers both senate races. NY-GOV covers the New York governor's race.

Tags do not compound: that is, "education reform" is a completely different tag from "education". A tag like "reform" alone is probably not meaningful.

Consider if one or more of these tags fits your diary: Civil Rights, Community, Congress, Culture, Economy, Education, Elections, Energy, Environment, Health Care, International, Labor, Law, Media, Meta, National Security, Science, Transportation, or White House. If your diary is specific to a state, consider adding the state (California, Texas, etc). Keep in mind, though, that there are many wonderful and important diaries that don't fit in any of these tags. Don't worry if yours doesn't.

You can add a private note to this diary when hotlisting it:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary from your hotlist?
Are you sure you want to remove your recommendation? You can only recommend a diary once, so you will not be able to re-recommend it afterwards.
Rescue this diary, and add a note:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary from Rescue?
Choose where to republish this diary. The diary will be added to the queue for that group. Publish it from the queue to make it appear.

You must be a member of a group to use this feature.

Add a quick update to your diary without changing the diary itself:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary?
(The diary will be removed from the site and returned to your drafts for further editing.)
(The diary will be removed.)
Are you sure you want to save these changes to the published diary?

Comment Preferences

  •  I'm reminded of the song (3+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    debedb, sdgeek, MinistryOfTruth

    "Video killed the radio star"

    In this instance, the interent killed the printed news.

    It's a new world, and I think the printed newspaper is going the way of the dodo.

    The internet is going to kill it.

  •  The Seattle PI (8+ / 0-)

    is printing it's final issue this very minute.

    No coincidence, I received an application from a heat-set web press operator today.

    •  It's going to be a sad day for me tomorrow (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:

      I've been reading the PI since I could read. The first thing I did as a kid living on my own was to subscribe, to have it delivered wherever I lived.

      Even though delivery people have broken two windows of mine over the years (at 4:30am!), I'll be bummed out Wednesday.

      R.I.P. P.I.

    •  In another life (0+ / 0-)

      decades ago, I worked on a paper with a hot lead press! I don't mourn it. The medium isn't the solution, it's the almost extinct profession of journalism.

  •  I Work In Advertising, But I'd Crawl (3+ / 0-)

    across a road with nothing but broken glass to buy a paper. I both love and hate I can read a paper and get ink on my hands. As I watch/see papers die all around me it makes me very sad!

    "We are what we repeatedly do. Excellence then, is not an act, but a habit." - Aristotle

    by webranding on Mon Mar 16, 2009 at 10:20:45 PM PDT

  •  Papers need to find a way to capitalize . . . (0+ / 0-)

    on their web content.  I'm certain that there is some kind of a subscription/payment model out there that works.  The big challenge is that online publications need to combine their efforts in order to maximize value.  $60 to read online NYTimes Op-eds is too much.  However $60 a year, $5 a month, to read the NY Times, the Post, McClatchy, and other online news services makes sense.

    The online revenue streams wouldn't be sufficient to sustain full press operations, but they could go a long way towards supplementing other revenue streams.

  •  Yeah. (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:

    This economic environment has only sped up the pending demise of newspapers, in my opinion. I'm 21 and my parents subscribe to the Houston Chronicle, but I do not currently, nor will I ever, subscribe to a newspaper. Once my generation fully enters "adult life," newspapers will really start to struggle. You ain't seen nothin yet!

    "FORMER President Bush." You can't say that enough.

    by jem286 on Tue Mar 17, 2009 at 12:26:22 AM PDT

  •  Agree and ditto (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:

    I have just begun using a Kindle. I can get that morning paper as I sleep, wherever I am. Dead trees and toxic ink do not make a newspaper--journalists do! Unfortunately, we are really short of journalists. I can't cry crocodile trees about dead trees when I'm mourning for journalists.

  •  You've Been Rescued (0+ / 0-)

    "What the cynics fail to understand is that the ground has shifted beneath them"

    by ItsJessMe on Tue Mar 17, 2009 at 08:43:50 PM PDT

  •  During my 30 years in journalism (0+ / 0-)

    I gritted my teeth every time a redesign was ordered and a new mission statement full of corporate gibberish was unveiled by the highest-paid people in the place, people who had no production skills, people who could be gone for weeks and nobody would miss. What a waste of time and money, and now the chickens have come home to roost.
    There is a place and a need for paper and ink. When you read online, and I do a lot, you miss so much. It's not good for an informed populace. It's pathetic.

    Dream, that's the thing to do (Johnny Mercer)

    by plankbob on Wed Mar 18, 2009 at 03:43:41 AM PDT

    •  Yeah I kind of agree ... (0+ / 0-)

      as I've said, I'm a newsprint guy, and hate to see the print side tanking, but my argument is if the print product is going to be inferior in content and reporting because of the economy, just do away with the print, invest in a few quality reporters and editors and make the online product as best as it can be. There's no need to denigrate journalism further by making the print product look like a comic book.

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site