Regarding the stories "Maybe It Is Time to Panic" and
"Enough Is Enough" in the April/May issue, it's patently
obvious how to stop the slide of newspapers into oblivion: Torch your
Web sites. Burn 'em down. If people wish to be informed, make them
pay for a good, quality product with a 300-year track record--the
newspaper.
To borrow a metaphor from the media's current fascination with
prostitution: If you're giving it away free out the back door of
the brothel, the paying customers will disappear.
It's lunacy for newspapers to post their stories on the Web
when there is no viable way to post the advertisements that pay for the
reporting. The medium of the Internet simply doesn't support a
practical model for the reader to observe ads in tandem with stories and
never will.
But 10 years ago, publishers piled on to the Internet bandwagon,
believing that if they got a head start with their own Web sites the
riches would somehow materialize once someone solved the conundrum of
advertising. Now, they're paying for their greed, pumping resources
into a bad model for the newspaper. It's similar to the dotcom
bubble going bust in the '90s when the geniuses of Silicon Valley
learned that people would rather shop in stores than online.
The all-purpose local Web newspaper that is a
"must-visit" for readers will never succeed because the Web is
too amorphous and the medium undercuts the newspaper's age-old
monopoly. Posting a newspaper Web site just adds more gas to the fire of
burning down the institution of print.
Newspapers need to spend less time studying technology and more
time studying human nature. If there was a national movement to scuttle
newspaper Web sites and make our content sacrosanct, combined with a new
commitment to jazzing up our pages, you'd see this downward spiral
turn around.
ROBERT DOWNES
Editor / co-publisher
Northern Express Weekly
Traverse City, Michigan
I read with ironic bemusement Carl Sessions Stepp's piece of
admonition to the news media ("Maybe It Is Time to Panic"). He
represents the huge intellectual disconnect between the huge
intellectual disconnect between the reader and the media. At no time in
his piece did he choose to address the reader's No. 1 complaint
about the media. For years, the public in poll after overwhelming poll
has been screaming about the lack of balance. The public approval rating
of the media is somewhere between 9 percent and 19 percent, depending on
who is conducting the poll. An F starts at 69 percent. This makes the
news media by statistic the sleaziest legal profession in existence.
[ILLUSTRATION OMITTED]
Unless and until the media start recognizing this and making the
appropriate changes to provide what the reader wants, the bloodbath will
continue. Truly we are in the modern day renaissance of yellow dog
journalism.
JOHN WILDER
Jacksonville, Florida
When will I be able to open up AJR and see a truly representative
story about the true benefits newspapers provide in today's world?
[ILLUSTRATION OMITTED]
Instead of reading about their demise, in EVERY SINGLE ISSUE, why
can't we be doing stories that get to the root of all?
In fact, there is still no one single medium that gets a better
return for an advertiser's investment than a newspaper. More people
consistently read their newspaper and act on the invitation to do
business with the advertisers than on any Web site, and this trend will
continue for a LONG time.
Tell me one place where you can guarantee the same person will see
your ad, day in and day out, on a Web site. You can't. Because Web
site traffic is too fickle and there are too many Web sites for people
to choose from. Just look at the Facebook/My Space trends. It used to be
Yahoo! before that. In a matter of a year, people got bored with Yahoo!
instant chat and moved on to more interactive things.
Which brings me to the story I'd really like to see. What
should papers be doing? Instead of worrying about how long we will be
around, we should get back to what made us what we are: Local news that
only we can do! People will still read things about their neighbors and
people who live among them. Even though we may not be able to compete
against the age of "instant breaking news" in our printed
pages anymore, we still have readers who want local news.
If all the corporate people put as much effort into getting their
editors to cover what the reader actually wants, and for that matter,
can't get anyplace else, then they would be much better off, and
would be able to steadily stop the decline of their circulation.
Newspapers, although having to adapt to the changing population and
needs of the younger readers, have always found ways to keep people
reading. It was no different when I was young, and it will be no
different for the next group of youngsters either. The key lies in being
able to get them interested in what they are reading. Informative,
entertaining and educational: the foundations newspapers were built on.
We need to collectively ring the bell that newspapers are here,
we're strong and we are not going to be replaced. We just simply
must do things a little differently. That starts with thinking
differently in the newsrooms and staying aggressive with our message to
our clients. If we keep writing the doom and gloom stories about
ourselves, who will be left to blame for the ultimate tumble?
Now that would make a good story!
JEFF SCHUMACHER
General manager
Mountaineer Publishing Co.
Waynesville, North Carolina
I'm so angry at institutions in journalism calling for its
practitioners to give up the old ways. This is like the Catholic Church
adopting elements of Protestantism to get more customers.
There comes a point where compromising constituted standards
becomes so prevalent that one must concede that we've lost the
mission. We're guided in a quest to accommodate confirmed
non-readers rather than our faithful readership.
There's so much talk of new competition, but name one
that's risen with the venerable institutions. All arguments come to
an end with the reality that the pros are emulating the amateurs.
DAVE BERNARD
Public affairs
WRCA Radio
Cambridge, Massachusetts
COPYRIGHT 2008 University of
Maryland Reproduced with permission of the copyright holder. Further reproduction or distribution is prohibited without permission.
Copyright 2008 Gale, Cengage Learning. All rights
reserved. Gale Group is a Thomson Corporation Company.
NOTE: All illustrations and photos have been removed from this article.