Black, White and Not Read All Over
If anyone doesn’t think life is tough in the newspaper world is tough, go talk to the more than three dozen people laid off this week at the Indianapolis Star.
The Star is a victim of a number of factors, but I’ve always wondered in the 21st Century is there still a need for a daily printed edition of a newspaper? Most content can be delivered on-line to your computer, laptop or cell phone. It’s much cheaper to push “send” than to run a printing press.
Some papers have already cutback daily circulation. And the weekly model does work, just ask NUVO, the Indianapolis Business Journal or Politico. And at the same time while newspapers can change delivery methods, with the savings they hire more reporters and focus on developing stronger content.
The old news cycle used to be you heard the news on the radio, watched it on television that night and read about it in the paper the next day. By the time the news is printed in the paper, it’s old. I would use my newspaper for more analytical pieces rather that straight reporting, while my website would keep readers updated on daily news.
Of course the trick in all this is to make money. It can be done, but it requires strong content and more efficient delivery mechanisms full integration of all media tools and some smart, visionary leadership.
Now all I need is a few million bucks to get started.
July 10th, 2009 at 7:36 am
As an “senior citizen” I view the loss of printed newspapers as a sad point but since do use the internet for wide variety of content, I do understand the changing world. The competition on readership on line will likely make being financially sucessful a difficult undertaking. Example, enjoy following this blog but how deep is my committment–it is already one of over 20 sites checked each day (including two general newspapers, a business newspaper, several business sites, content specific sites, and a few blogs such as this, etc.) but how faithful–have to admit to being fickle and just might not be back for days and would be hard pressed to pay for such access. End result is there unfortunately may be less indepth and critical and consistent coverage issues being available in the future. That is, less informed public particularly on common issues.
July 10th, 2009 at 8:47 am
There are significant quality issues. If journalists were held to product liability standard which they espouse for those in other professions; they would've been out of business a long time ago. While technology, timing & delivery are factors, quality issues have driven consumers to “select media” like this blog. Papers were / are ideally positioned to blog the way forward but really aren't competitive and the “why” is again a quality issue. Paper cups get mushy after a few refills and there are limits to the efficacy of ideologic inbreeding.
July 10th, 2009 at 9:11 am
Dave, I don't blame the journalists. Most want to do quality, investigative work. Their employers though want them to churn out simple stories that don't allow them to do quality, investigative reporting.
July 10th, 2009 at 9:32 am
Most journalists cannot do quality work. The average SAT scores of journalist majors barely outpace those of elementary education majors. Long time editor complained to me once that if there was ever any math in a story that he personally had to check it to ensure that it was accurate. Never used to have radio show hosts with law degrees but we still find Abdul and Greg in error and, quite often. Journalists in the major media tend to be whores with a viewpoint and preachy about it to the extent that the common reader knows that they are not impartial observers and rarely tell the truth. Who needs garbage in?
July 10th, 2009 at 11:16 am
Pascal…just a question. Why so negative about EVERYTHING?
July 10th, 2009 at 11:16 am
So if Greg and I are in so much error, why do you come here?
July 10th, 2009 at 11:35 am
What will I use for the bottom of my bird cage if the Ryerson Rag fails?
Flipper
July 10th, 2009 at 11:50 am
Dear Paul: These folks are in the communication business! Editors are likewise responsible for the quality of the product. It's reasonable to expect an abiding interest in a professional standard, where there's a rigorous commitment to accuracy, far different than expecting first run, flawless “perfection.” Our government made blunders in the involvement & execution of the Vietnam War, but creepy Uncle Walter's imbalanced, discount coverage of the TET Offensive was a blue light special for self loathing on sale, hackademia & the hatriot movement; at a time when he was “on top” of his shame. Heck, I'd go so far as to call him “…a warped, frustrated, old man” whose best wishes for the minions is other than a wonderful life. Of course there's Dan Rather Make It Up, Doris Kearns Goodwin & other illuminaries of “modern journalism” who've inspired generations of malpractitioners. In one of his song's (Rain on The Scarecrow), Mellencamp observes, “…Hey calling it your job ol hoss sure dont make it right…”
July 10th, 2009 at 11:59 am
I read a blogpost that stated it would be cheaper for the New York Times to provide each of its subscribers (not including those that pick up copies at a newsstand) a Kindle and have them download a daily copy of the paper, then what it currently costs them to print and deliver the paper for a year. I have not checked the numbers but it sounds plausible to me. It wouldn't surprise me if in 10 years the “paper” newspaper goes the way of horse and buggy – there may be a few still out there, but it sure won't be what most people use.
July 10th, 2009 at 1:07 pm
The correction of error ought to be appreciated. I appreciate tips from folks whose advice lowers my golf score, like, keep your head still, keep eye on ball, don't overswing, etc. etc. Rather than be huffy about being corrected follow the advice about having more than one source when you are wearing your journalist hat. For instance, for your other readers, what was the source for the story that ISTEP test scores could now be used in the evaluation of the teachers in Indiana? And, when you have more than one source, as you do, even on this matter, how do you decide which one to run with? When one source is later than another but correct do we do retractions? The Indy Star would run red ink if they had a retraction policy. Folks of a liberal point of view see nothing wrong with a New York Times filtering content to fit their liberal point of view-the rest of us would just as soon have objective news and will go to wherever we can find it.
July 10th, 2009 at 1:40 pm
My source is the state budget. I read it.
July 10th, 2009 at 2:20 pm
I stopped my subscription to the Ryerson Rag a month ago. Since Gannett bought the local newspaper & brought in a Left Coast editor who is out-of-touch with the community values of Central Indiana, the paper has not only lost quality, but appears to be a left-wing liberal propaganda device. Gannett is clearly trying to impose a leftist homosexual agenda on Central Indiana. I said “enough”, terminated my subscription of 20 years, and let the publisher know that Gannett does NOT understand Indiana values.
If the Ryerson Rag fails, it is due to the publisher being out-of-touch with our community and trying to use propaganda to promote a Left Coast agenda.
July 10th, 2009 at 2:30 pm
Leftist Homosexual agenda? I guess you majored in hyperbole ion college. And fiction.
Those of us who remember the fanatical Bircher-inspired editorial pages of the Pulliams, are glad that those pages are at least balanced now. As for the dearth of good local news coverage, well…you're right. But check out the electronic media. Those bozos don't understand news judgment….it's pitiful.
July 10th, 2009 at 2:32 pm
It is in no way “balanced”. It is a heavy slant to the far left.
July 10th, 2009 at 2:43 pm
Indy, you're just plain wrong. The syndicated columnists are about 50-50. The local editorials are, well, all over the board. I honestly don't know how they arrive at their opinions sometimes, and they often make little sense.
Harken back to Pulliam days, when the editorial page was one of America's most-far-right. Absolutely no balance. Plus, when Daddy Pulliam wanted to go off on a tangent, he did, and directed reporters to do likewise. That's how we got Dan Quayle in the Senate….Birch Bayh had opposed the Geist/Morse projects, which benefitted NOT the IWCV ratepayers, but a few wealthy Pulliam friends. Daddy objected so much, he pushed his nephew on us, and the rest is history.
So even IF the current editorial slant is far left, which it's not, the pendulum, over time, would keep it far left for another 40 years to remain value-neutral over the long period.
Pay closer attention.
July 10th, 2009 at 2:56 pm
Always interesting to attempt to determine where someone is on the left or right scale and just how far out they are—one barometer is to try to determine how much of the scale is still left or right of their position. Example if on a scale where 1 is extreme left/liberal and 10 extreme right(ous)/conservative–thus someone who is a 4 there are lot wacko right wingers out there and editorials are virturally always too off base—-then on the other hand if you are an 8 then the world is full of left leaning commies and virtually every editorial or articles goes over board being too liberal. Begin to wonder if there are many people who can look at things without looking for boggie material just want to know the facts and alternative ways of looking at it—maybe too much to ask.
July 10th, 2009 at 3:18 pm
Indy4u2c….I pray to God that your values do NOT represent the values of the citizens of central Indiana. If they do, we are doomed. You have such a megative and mean spirited outlook on everything.
July 10th, 2009 at 3:54 pm
I spent 10 years as a newspaper journalist, and my father worked for probably 15 in classified advertising from the early '60s to the mid '70s. Even though he went through a cold-type revolution, the delivery of the paper differs very little today from his early days at the newspaper — and other than using cars, it's not much different from the early 1900s!
July 10th, 2009 at 4:18 pm
Clearly you seemed to have gotten the ONLY left-leaning copy. The (vast) majority of the content leans right; remember the paper still puts a bible verse on the front page.
July 10th, 2009 at 4:20 pm
Besides Dan Carpenter and Sheila Suess Kennedy who on that paper leans left?
July 10th, 2009 at 4:46 pm
Ryerson
July 10th, 2009 at 4:48 pm
Where is the daily prayer? Ohh, the leftists removed it!
July 10th, 2009 at 4:53 pm
Value neutral? -What kind of leftist propaganda is that???
I thought a local newspaper would be a reflection of local community values, and publish that which the local community finds of interest…
Why would a local community want a newspaper without the values of the community…or a “value neutral” publication? Would it serve anyone? Does “neutral” sell?
July 10th, 2009 at 4:54 pm
What is negative or mean-spirited? -Or are you just using “buzzwords” to plant a seed of nullification in truth?
July 10th, 2009 at 6:57 pm
While the Indy Star may have some conservative-written columns, one need look no further than the front page headlines to see where their true loyalties lie.
For me, the Star jumped the shark when they endorsed the undeniably delusional Julia Carson for her last term in the House, virtually securing the seat for a Carson for life. Too bad Abdul's good friend Matt Tully didn't get the ax.
July 10th, 2009 at 8:52 pm
The Star always opposed Julia Carson until 2004. Their unsuccessful endorsement of her opponents from 1972 to 2002 obviously carried no weight — while nice, their 2004 & 2006 endorsements had just as much effect on the voters!
July 10th, 2009 at 9:53 pm
So much fodder for comment, so little space and time.
Wilson said it very well…and I so rarely agree with him completely. Wilson, didn't The Star name Julia “Woman of the Year” in '95 or so? I recall her reaction: “Hell just froze.” Readers voted on that honor, or ESP would never have allowed it. She'd just completely pulled the trustee's office from horrid debt, and instilled some workfare relief systems. Julia Mae confounded her rightwing opponents with that one.
Indy4u2c, you're so full of crap it's oozing out your finger tips as you type. You ask what you said that was hateful. In the spirit you typed it, I'm sure “leftist homosexual agenda” was not a love letter. Although I'm pretty sure you don't know a leftist homosexual, thus their agenda, if any, would escape you.
But you're right about one thing: I probably should've said something other than”value neutral” for the Star's editorial pages. Which is what I was talking about. Their opinion pages are close to 50-50, which I did say. A complete reversal from ESP's days, when they were a national laughing stock.
An editorial page's job is to motivate us to think. The current page does that, with varied opinions, most of which I read daily, regardless of their viewpoint. I learn the most from those with whom I disagree–they force me to reinforce my views or alter them with new info.
A concept you might wanna try. Or is it really that comfortable in your pigeonhole? Throwing potshots at folks who don't follow your far-right mantra?
Your world is shrinking, though, and that must be difficult. So mostly, I pity you. And commend to your reading pleasure, one or two of Elanor Clift's columns, which are gems.
July 11th, 2009 at 1:23 am
Matt Tully wrote a column a few days after the election recounting how Julia seemed to be hallucinating during his interview with her a week or so prior. If the Star had been as diligent in reporting that fact as it had reporting the issue of Eric Dickerson's arrest (that was, incidentally, given them by Julia herself), perhaps the election would have had a different outcome. But, the Star got its way, and now we have Julia's idiot grandson pretending to represent us.
Nobody ever said Julia never contributed to center township. That was ages ago. She was, in fact, a representative in the U.S. House for over a decade after that honor was bestowed on her. What did she do for our community the decade before she passed? Start demanding accountability of your elected, public servants and maybe things will get better for everyone.
July 11th, 2009 at 7:48 am
Last year the Star fruitlessly endorsed young André Carson's opponent in the Special Congressional Election. Nevertheless, the voters chose André who then went on to win the regular election with over 65% of the vote!
July 11th, 2009 at 8:17 am
Your inaccurate and unwarranted attack on Rep. Andre Carson is offensive. He is a hard working intelligent congressman and is getting noticed in D.C. for his his efforts. Talk to people in the neighborhoods or organizations in Indy. Those people know how helpful and hardworking he is. I personally think he has a great voting record but I guess that depends on your point of view. Perhaps you mean comments re: Andre were just an extension of your Julia hating days.
July 11th, 2009 at 8:41 am
The Indianapolis Star is the single worst thing about this city.
They support every big government scheme – including the new Colts stadium, Pacers arena, and airport – none of which were needed, all of which were make-work projects.
Their editorial board and reporting staff is overwhelmingly white…they never feature a person or a business in 46201, unless it's related to a murder. Lilly, Scott Jones, SNS, ethanol, and other silliness from the business world is pumped up daily by addle-headed writers like John Ketzenberger.
As for Nuvo (also overwhelmingly white), if it wasn't for the prostitution ads, the paper would not exist.
July 11th, 2009 at 12:17 pm
…as is typical of leftists, you imply and infer a twisted meaning of true words. If you think “leftist homosexual agenda” is hateful, then nothing I can say will change your twisted views. That term is an accurate and factual classification. As for your wrongful assertion that I do not know any leftist homosexuals…Wilson has posted above in this blog.
Think Again, it's time for you to put thought into your posts, stop using buzzwords (ie “hatred”), and realize true facts and classifications do not constitute your buzzword of “hatred”. It's time you lefty's stop appealing to emotion by using buzzwords, and try to address the true facts.
July 11th, 2009 at 1:45 pm
Yes, I've known Indy4u2c (Jocelyn Tandy) for many years as a perennial (yet losing) candidate. She's probably lost more elections than anybody else in Indianapolis history! LOL
July 11th, 2009 at 5:32 pm
I think any notion of Dan Carpenter being an “Op-Ed” writer is long behind us. I'd welcome someone writing from the other pair of shoes as often as him. Or, I'll trade Cal Thomas for Dan Carpenter, straight up. Better yet, Cal Thomas for the Ball State guy that used to host Washington Week in Review. Ken Somebody? Ayyee Caramba!
.
Seriously, as much as I belly-ache about journalism, from looking at every source I could find in the course of the Presidential election, I thought the Star did a nice job. They're not perfect, but I enjoy reading both sides and I believe they do that. Ryerson is the ONLY journalist not ideologically rabid that acknowledged in print that some coverage of Palin was over the top.
July 13th, 2009 at 6:07 pm
http://indytaxdollars.typepad.com/indy_tax_doll... Blogs typically hit on some story begun by a lowly journalist and then improve upon it. This link is typical and it, and others, demonstrate that journalists lack the talent to really do a good job. In the case of the local paper it could be that they are under contraints or under demanded bias.
July 13th, 2009 at 11:07 pm
http://indytaxdollars.typepad.com/indy_tax_doll... Blogs typically hit on some story begun by a lowly journalist and then improve upon it. This link is typical and it, and others, demonstrate that journalists lack the talent to really do a good job. In the case of the local paper it could be that they are under contraints or under demanded bias.