An interesting thing about young print reporters is that many of us have never been just print reporters. Sure our work appears in print, but most newspapers were online before we were out of school. Those of us who came along after Arianna, Craig and Google have only heard stories about the boom times. We don’t know what it was like to work without a spell checker. Or, in most cases, looming staff cuts.
But one thing has remained constant over the years. As the old yarn goes, newspaper higher-ups regularly hold meetings at which they plan future meetings. For young, enterprising journalists — who in the last five years have seen several social networks come and go — the deliberate pace at which newspapers innovate can be painful to watch.
I started this blog for several reasons. One of my hopes is to bridge the online world with the print world. While the conversations taking place online, often among web entrepreneurs, journalism professors and web savvy, early adopting journalists, are fascinating and constructive, they can also be abstract and theoretical. Young metro reporters still finding their newsroom legs are more often concerned with the day-to-day challenges of their beats than they are with the big picture. If so, they are making a mistake.
The sooner they join the growing online conversation, start a blog, and contribute; the sooner things will change from the inside out rather than the outside in. And who knows, it might help speed things up. To follow are 10 suggestions for newspaper editors and publishers. I encourage other young journalists to compile their own lists. And please let me know if there’s a wiki floating around somewhere.
1. Do away with jumps (except on the front page and section covers). Newspaper readership has dropped sharply in the last few years. One of the reasons for this is that most young Americans do not receive the paper on a daily basis nor do they report reading one, according to “Young People and News,” released by the Joan Shorenstein Center on the Press, Politics and Public Policy at the John F. Kennedy School of Government at Harvard. “Even when they bother to read the newspaper, teens and young adults do so for a shorter period than do older adults,” the report noted. “Two-thirds of teen and young adult readers said they ‘usually skim through the news sections’ as opposed to reading ‘quite a few stories.’”
If print editions are to survive, editors and publishers must do a better job of reaching teens and young adults, the next generation of potential subscribers. From what I’ve gathered, young people often read a story until they reach the jump (note: the jump, or continuation, is where an article is interrupted and continued on a later page.) One reason for jumps is to conserve valuable real estate on the front page as well as inside sections. Editors use this space to layout stories, which they have ranked by order of importance. For example, stories A, B, C and D may run on A2 while stories E, F, G and H may run on A4.
The problem here is that readers who have become accustomed to getting their news through aggregators and social networks, which exercise far less editorial control, are less interested that an editor deems one package of stories better suited for A2 and another better suited for A4. Readers are more inclined to continue an uninterrupted story that holds their interest. So quit interrupting them.
To be clear, this recommendation applies only to inside pages. The front page must showcase the biggest stories. The covers of inside sections must do so as well. To piggyback an argument made by Howard Owens, newspaper publishers could do themselves a favor by making their 2009 front pages look more like they did in 1971.
“That should be your print design model and your print content model,” Owens wrote. “I’d even bet that you would get some young readers back with such an approach, because your paper would finally appeal to what should be your target demographic — people who like to read the news.”
2. Give us the 5 Ws and an H (twice). As any diligent student of Journalism 101 will tell you, the 5 Ws and an H (who, what, where, when, why and how) are the facts that must appear somewhere near the beginning of a news story. For each news story running longer than a few paragraphs, newspapers should provide readers with a small breakout box containing the words, “Who,” “What,” “Where,” “When,” “Why” and “How.” Alongside each of these categories reporters would fill in the information. The box would run with the story, not replace it. See example below:
Headline: Bay Area pilot hailed as hero in N.Y. plane crash
Who: Chesley B. “Sully” Sullenberger III, 57, of Danville, Calif.
What: Sullenberger was hailed by New York Mayor Michael Bloomberg, by New York Gov. David Paterson, by his passengers and by masses of New Yorkers as news spread of his lifesaving landing.
Where: New York City.
When: Thursday (Jan. 15, 2009).
Why: The plane apparently blew both engines after hitting a flock of birds shortly after its 3:26 p.m. takeoff from LaGuardia Airport.
How: Sullenberger was catapulted to fame after saving all 155 people aboard a US Airways A320, easing the crippled plane down in the frigid Hudson, then helping frightened passengers to safety and checking the cabin – twice – before leaving the sinking plane himself. He has decades of experience not only flying planes – first F-4s for the U.S. Air Force and since 1980 all kinds of aircraft for US Airways – but of studying and teaching others how to fly them more safely.
Americans have only so much time to consume news. Assuming they spend an hour a day with the newspaper, that’s hardly enough time to read every story. The breakout box would bring readers up to speed on every news story, allowing them to dig into reports that catch their eye for additional information, color and context.
3. Provide a forum to continue discussions started by guest columnists (and give us their extended biography and some background, too). In May 2007, the San Francisco Chronicle ran a guest column written by Neil Henry. Henry, as we learn from the short description that follows his column, is “a former Washington Post correspondent [and] a professor of journalism at the University of California at Berkeley. His latest book is ‘American Carnival: Journalism Under Siege in an Age of New Media,’ (University of California Press, 2007).”
Under the headline, The decline of news, Henry used 1,227 words to explain how Google and Yahoo are profiting by using content from newspapers, which are struggling.
For their part, Google executives maintain that the travails of the American newspaper industry today are hardly their fault. They argue that their informational enterprises simply help the public find whatever it is looking for. They insist that the problems of newspapers are the result of market forces, driven by the continuing technological revolution.
Last week, at a conference on the state of American newspapers at Stanford, Google Vice President Marissa Mayer reportedly made this argument quite clearly. She said simply: “We are computer scientists, not journalists.
While that may be true, the time has come for corporations such as Google to accept more responsibility for the future of American journalism, in recognition of the threat ‘computer science’ poses to journalism’s place in a democratic society.
It is no longer acceptable for Google corporate executives to say that they don’t practice journalism, they only work to provide links to ‘content providers.’ Journalism is not just a matter of jobs, and dollars and cents lost. It is a public trust vital to a free society. It stands to reason that Googleand corporations like it, who indirectly benefit so enormously from the expensive labor of journalists, should begin to take on greater civic responsibility for journalism’s plight. Is it possible for Google to somehow engage and support the traditional news industry and important local newspapers more fully, for example, to become a vital part of possible solutions to this crisis instead of a part of the problem?
Months later I came across Ryan Sholin’s 10 obvious things about the future of newspapers you need to get through your head. Before the age of bloggers, guest columnists could spout off and receive little reaction. Readers could respond with letters to the editor or a dueling guest column, but these are edited forums. The online comment sections are OK for comments, but not designed to highlight a specific, well-reported response.
What newspapers need is an online forum where readers and bloggers could respond to guest columns. Of course, bloggers could also post responses on their own blogs, but a post in the forum is much more likely to reach the casual reader, not just those who would seek it out. I selected guest columns because they often seem to come from left field, aren’t necessarily written by experts and seem to stir emotions. Because guest columnists are often unknown, the forum would also include essays and articles that provide background or support their column. Also, how much did we really learn from Henry’s three-sentence biography? Not much. The forum would include something along the lines of this.
4. Tell more stories about people. Sounds simple enough, no? In these trying times, it would be easy for newspaper editors and publishers to give up on these types of stories. Stories like this, this and this take digging, reporting. But people want to read about people. Newspaper people love to repeat the phrase, “We’re kings of content.” Oh yeah, prove it. Here’s Mike Barnicle on the topic:
There’s no more news. You get it on your belt buckle. Fifteen seconds after it happens. Your toaster. Your blender. You’ve got 600 channels at home. That morning paper, the people who go out to the end of the driveway or to go into the variety store, to pick up that paper, they all look like Wilford Brimley. And these old white guys running these papers haven’t figured that out. They haven’t figured out that three blocks from here you have the Harvard Crimson, the Harvard Lampoon. And over there, hire some 23-year old kids, but bring them back into the building, show them a desk, take their phone away. Shut their phone off, and say ‘Hey kid, it’s 10 o’clock in the morning. Go out the door. Come back at five with a story.’ And the kid will say, ‘What kind of a story?’ Any fucking story. A story. Go get a story. Don’t sit here and call people up. Go get a story. Go ride the train. Go sit in the Boston Common. Watch people pass by. Try to imagine what they do for a living. Why is the guy wearing one brown shoe and one black shoe? Why is the 65-year old guy carrying a school bag? Why is the nurse crying sitting on the bench? Go write a story. People like to read about people. That’s never going to change.
5. And let people tell stories. On Dec. 14, The Oakland Press, a daily newspaper published in Oakland County, Michigan, announced the formation of The Oakland Press Institute for Citizen Journalism, inviting readers to attend classes. Editors and publishers must understand that citizen journalism can only enhance their product. Newspapers should consider holding weekly classes and inviting the community in for an hour or two. The courses would mix theory and practical reporting skills, with the goal of creating a more media literate society.
At the courses, which would be taught by a rotating group of students, editors and college professors, citizen journalists would work with reporters on developing a tip line. In the future, if a graduate of the course comes across a great story, they could pursue it, working either alone or with one of the paper’s reporters. Or, if a graduate secures a newsworthy photo or video clip, they could share it with the paper.
Another way to let people tell stories is to allow them to look to the community for funding. Spot.Us, an open source, nonprofit project that gives the public a way to pay journalists for their reporting, is a great place to start. Newspapers would either publish fully funded, complete investigative reports, or even let members of their staffs look to the community for funding of a specific story.
6. Staff your social network accounts with real people. At 9:35 p.m. on Dec. 23, I sent the following tweet to @Suntimes, the official Twitter account of the Chicago Sun-Times: “What are we to make of http://is.gd/bZpR?AYR, Chris.” The link leads to a Dec. 16 report written by Sun-Times columnist Michael Sneed. Wrote Sneed:
Sneed hears rumbles President-elect Barack Obama’s chief of staff, Rahm Emanuel, is reportedly on 21 different taped conversations by the feds — dealing with his boss’ vacant Senate seat! A lot of chit-chat? Hot air? Or trouble? • • To date: Rahm’s been mum. Stay tuned.
I became interested in the Sneed column after seeing the bit of unverified gossip picked up by Drudge and a number of major news outlets. In my next tweet to @Suntimes, I wrote, “Awaiting a followup. She [Sneed] gets something as specific as 21 hours and then no more? No source?” @Suntimes swiftly returned my message, explaining that Sneed often gets her “scoops” and moves on.
I highlight this exchange because it demonstrates the power of social networks and the lengths some newspapers have gone to connect with readers. By switching off its automatic feed in September (which provided links to stories and little more), and following those who followed its Twitter account, the Sun-Times turned what was a one-way conversation into a dialogue between its staff and the public.
Other newspapers have also put warm bodies behind their Twitter accounts. See: LA Times (scroll down to see all 35), Austin American-Statesman, Grand Island Independent, Orlando Sentinel, Dallas Morning News and Chicago Tribune, which was featured in this Nieman Reports article.
There may be other ways for the public to connect with reporters and editors. We can call, send letters and e-mail, and even pester the ombudsman. But none of these have the intimacy or immediacy of Twitter. What’s more, when we place a call or write an e-mail, they only become public if the news organization prints them as letters to the editor. On Twitter, our messages are there for all to view. For example, when New York University professor Jay Rosen took issue with the way the news was being framed by the NewsHour with Jim Lehrer, he sent this tweet. When Rosen objected to this headline from the LA Times blog Top of the Ticket, calling it “INSANE,” we as interested readers could follow the conversation. FYI: Rosen got the last word.
7. Create an iPhone application. The iPhone, BlackBerry and other smartphones have become great platforms on which to display and read news. Readers can receive breaking news through RSS readers (Google Reader on the iPhone and BlackBerry works particularly well). If readers prefer to visit just one newspaper online, they have a couple of options: they can navigate to its main site, which is slow loading, its mobile site, designed to be browsed on a portable device, or search for an application to download.
Problem is, most newspapers still don’t offer applications, which are easy to browse and feature appealing layouts. The ideal application would include distinct categories, (local news, national news, world news, business, sports, entertainment, etc.,) a link to browse photos in these sections, sports scores, blogs, a business ticker and weather by location. For good examples see: USA TODAY, The AP and The New York Times.
8. Break certain news in the blogs, with a Flip, and let us respond on camera. Ever tried locating a blog on a newspaper’s website? If so, you know it can be a pain. Assuming you locate the blog, what do you do when you want to return, Google its name? Here are three simple ways for newspaper editors and publishers to clear up the confusion: give blogs unique urls, display blog posts in the same locations as stories, and break news in the blogs.
When newspapers first came online, editors loved the idea of teasing content that would run in the next day’s paper. Many editors required reporters to write a few paragraphs for the web before they went home for the day. Some newspapers still do this, while others have taken to running the whole story online as soon as it’s edited. My question: why not break news stories in a themed blog, like this? If the story is important enough, mix the link in with other big, breaking news.
Another way for reporters to capture breaking news or an interesting tidbit is to get it on camera. Editors and publishers should provide each of their reporters with small, relatively inexpensive video recorders, like the Flip Ultra. Don’t worry about training reporters or putting them through seminars. If they haven’t caught on by now, maybe they never will. If they don’t want to carry a small camera, they don’t have to. And don’t worry if the videos look raw and under produced. A short clip can quickly capture an exclusive moment, a mood that only enhances the story it would run alongside. Now is the time for experimentation. Throw things at the wall and see what sticks. It can only gain you readers.
Newspapers should also enable video responses to certain stories. If need be, approve them, or put them behind a login wall to protect innocent viewers from bad content.
9. Record all editorial meetings, webcast and blog them, and spike unsigned editorials. Gary Graham, editor of The Spokesman-Review of Spokane, Wash., which in June 2006 began streaming live online its morning and afternoon editorial meetings, told me in an e-mail that the newspaper ended its webcasts on Dec. 1. The webcasts had only a couple of regular viewers, he said. The paper also stopped updating its News Diary, a blog that gave readers an inside look at newsroom discussions, decisions and upcoming coverage. While the experiment in Spokane may not have worked out, at least not on the first try, there are enough sophisticated, news-hungry readers across the country that would appreciate the transparency.
If editors and publishers decide to keep the door shut on readers, the least they could do is make clear who on their editorial board supports an issue and who opposes it. The simplest way to do this is by doing away with unsigned editorials. In the past, the royal “we” often represented the opinion of a single owner with local ties. Today, the “we” is confusing, and creates the perception that the decisions made by the editorial board influences the way reporters cover and write news stories.
Those in favor of unsigned editorials say it’s the best way to present issues that editorial boards may be split over. But how fair is it that those on the losing side of an argument are lumped in with the rest? Editorial writers have spent years pouring over agendas and serving as watchdogs of government. They should get bylines on pieces they author. The remaining board members would be noted below, along with how they voted on the issue.
The best editorials contain original reporting. So, Mr. Editor and Mr. Publisher, hire people that know how to report and crusade, and can possibly read their writings on camera. To create a truly representative board, editors and publishers should bring in young, web-savvy agitators, local bloggers and opinionated journalists plugged into social networks both online and off.
10. Kill on-the-road coverage of sports (if you must). If not, try something new. My heroes are sportswriters. Sports coverage and commentary introduced me to newspapers and journalism. But traveling beat reporters, and certainly a traveling staff photographer, are becoming too expensive for some publications.
Rarely does a night go by when I don’t know the result of a game minutes after the final horn sounds. I have little use for 20 inches of coverage the morning after the game when on the night of the game I can get online and watch the press conference, catch breaking news and get box scores.
There are still a few can’t-miss sports columnists, but how many have ditched newspapers for TV, radio or both? How many have been hired away by ESPN, Yahoo and AOL? After walking away from his job at the Chicago Sun-Times, columnist and ESPN regular Jay Mariotti said this: “I’m a competitor and I get the sense this marketplace doesn’t compete. Everyone is hanging on for dear life at both papers. I think probably the days of high-stakes competition in Chicago are over.” He added that the future of his business “sadly is not in newspapers.” But it could be, if editors and publishers agree to do things differently.
Mark Cuban, the billionaire entrepreneur, chairman of HDNet and and owner of the Dallas Mavericks, recently wrote that, “Pro sports, every single league, from the NFL to NBA to MLB to MLS to NHL need newspapers. This need exists because of what internet sports reporting has become, and how LOCAL team fans have evolved to use the net.”
My suggestion to the powers that be in the leagues I have spoken to is to have the leagues work together and create a ‘beatwriter co-operative.’ We need to create a company that funds, depending on the size of the market and number of teams, 2 or more writers per market, to cover our teams in depth. The writers would cover multiple teams and multiple sports. They will report to the newspapers where the articles will be placed, who will have complete editorial control. In exchange, the newspapers will provide a minimum of a full page on a daily basis in season, and some lesser amount out of season. That the coverage will include game reporting that is of far more depth than is currently in place, along with a minimum number of feature articles each week in and out of season. And most importantly, these articles will be exclusive to print subscribers. They can do all the ad supported short summaries online and minute by minute blog posts and tweets they would like. To make this work, print editions and subscriber only online sites have to become the defacto destinations for in depth and unique coverage. They have to become the local version of ESPN.com’s for pay ‘ESPN Insider.’
Why not give it a try? Or, why not let fans, who are already attending games, write stories for newspaper websites? Don’t think they’ll do it for peanuts, check out Bleacher Report, which runs on volunteer contributors and has partnerships with Fox Sports and CBSsports.com. The content is also edited and polished by volunteers, like Wikipedia. Sports reporters could still cover home games. Columnists — if they stick around — could still write about local issues. Mix it up. Try something new. You may just save the sports section.
Other suggestions: Embed links in every story running longer than 12 inches (don’t worry, they’ll come back.) Do more public service and explanatory journalism. Offer tutorials and crash courses for cub reporters on oft-breaking news events. Make stories fully viewable in RSS readers. Stop whining. Listen to us young reporters every once in a while.
