-
Not a Dark Age, Just 50 Shades of Gray
March 16, 2013 | 0 comments
-
Whose Rule of Law?
October 31, 2012 | 15 comments
-
Will the LIBOR Scandal Help Re-Elect Obama?
July 30, 2012 | 17 comments
-
When Baseball Was More Than a Game
April 17, 2012 | 24 comments
-
Risk Responsibly
September 23, 2011 | 18 comments
Media Matters
Good Riddance
What do you expect from a newspaper industry that has outdone Detroit in wasting its franchise?
As I mark my fiftieth year in the craft of journalism may I be excused for letting loose a small raspberry at the flood of handwringing going on over The Decline of the American Daily Newspaper.
What do you expect from an industry that has outdone Detroit in wasting its franchise? The hard historical fact of life is that many great American news titles ended up being owned by absentees and operated by cretins who thought they were manufacturing a product when in fact journalism, in whatever format, is and always has been a service.
There is a difference. In manufacturing, say widgets, if you can make the same number of widgets with fewer workers and a leaner mix of raw materials the productivity gain will translate into expanded profits. But if one starts watering down a service with fewer providers, with stingier resources, and empty information calories instead of the news nourishment consumers want, well then one deserves what one gets.
So when once-great newspapers (and I count the Washington Post among them) systematically empty their newsroom of truly first-class news gatherers, and when the product that results is the work of lower-wage naifs who lack sources and perspective, who confuse skepticism with partisanship, who substitute snark for insight, then what in the pluperfect hell does management expect to happen? Why should advertisers spend their dollars pitching to a room that is rapidly emptying of potential customers?
How we came to forget this truth that predates the founding of our Republic I cannot say. Certainly 23-year-old Benjamin Franklin knew the difference when he bought the weakest of the eight weekly colonial newspapers exactly 280 years ago. The Pennsylvania Gazette he took over serialized boring novels, cribbed old articles from London magazines, and had become the political tool of one of the factions of the day. By the time Franklin was finished it boasted the largest circulation and a readership that stretched from Charleston to Boston — and two full pages of paid advertising. What the new Gazette provided was news that Americans had to have, news of ships arriving and leaving, of fires, disasters, and Indian raids, but also of business deals, goods being traded, and of course of politics, lots of politics. He printed both sides of disputes but took sides with arguments that carried the now forgotten word — authority. Readers argued with him but never questioned his integrity.
In my time I worked for four daily news organizations and four major newsmagazines of some repute. Of the dailies, two don’t exist at all, one is bleeding to death, and the fourth has moved to a new format altogether. Of the magazines, one has vanished, two have become irrelevancies and the fourth has deteriorated into a shill for its owner’s other media interests. The universal response of managements and their “consolidations and restructuring” has merely added to the hemorrhaging of a patient already near bled to death.
Good riddance, say I. And goodbye to the Post and a host of other dailies elsewhere if they continue to ladle out the thin gruel they have been serving us with injunctions that we should be grateful. At the same time it also is true that compared with the America where I began my labors way back then, today there actually is available more hard news, more authoritative detail, more sophisticated analysis on a whole range of global issues than the big dailies were able to provide with their once vaunted foreign services and big Washington bureaus. It’s called the Internet.
While there is a lot of gibberish among the blogs and special pleading websites, there also is a host of very fine information services that offer analysis, expertise, impartiality, and (oh, joy) authority on areas from intelligence, foreign policy, the environment, politics, culture and the arts, science and health, to almost any topic that interests you. Just go on line and there it is, much of it in real time and without the filter of this new generation of broadcast and print news providers who have trouble naming the line of succession of American presidents from Roosevelt to Obama without using their fingers.
There is bad news in the midst of this good news. If you cling to the myth that a free and democratic society depends on all citizens having equal access to news from the public arena the development of a two-tier information system should cause concern. For while the Internet information services are easily accessible they are not free, indeed some cost thousands of dollars a year both in subscriptions and downloading fees. Those who cannot afford to be without the raw ingredients of reality will find the money somewhere; the vast number of people may have to do without.
But from where I sit that vast number of people apparently can’t tell the difference between what they used to get and what is now thrown onto their doorstep in the morning or blared out from their favorite television chatter show. Information has morphed into entertainment and comforting prejudices edge aside often unpleasant reality.
The confusion and uncertainty that so frightens us today is an inescapable consequence. We get what we deserve.
About the Author
James Srodes, an author and broadcaster, is a former Washington bureau chief for Forbes and Financial Worldmagazines. His latest book, On Dupont Circle: Franklin and Eleanor Roosevelt and the Progressives Who Shaped Our World, is being published next week. His email address is srodesnews@msn.com.
Letter to the Editor View all comments (38) | Leave a comment
More Articles by James Srodes
More Articles From Media Matters
http://spectator.org/archives/2009/04/21/good-riddance
Follow us:
ADVERTISEMENT
SPONSORED LINKS
FLASHBACK TO: 1995
-
Pope Culture
A man of faith in a godless age is hitting Americans where it hurts.
-
Why the GOP Does Not, Like, Totally Suck
Mr. and Mrs. American Spectator Reader, let P.J. O’Rourke talk sense to your kids.
-
Dames at Sea
-
In the Absence of Guns
In Britain, defending your property can get you life.
-
The Metaphysical Martini
-
Counting the Costs of Clintonism
The debacle of this president’s administration is both a cause and a symptom of the decline of American values. Unless Congress impeaches him, that decline will go on unchecked. An eminent jurist surveys the damage and assesses the chances for the recovery of our culture.
-
Chuck McHagel
It won’t take long for conservatives to scratch this presidential wannabe off their 2008 scorecard.
-
The Legacy of Old John and Mother Fresh-Roasted
-
It’s the Best Time of the Year
The American Christmas, like the songs that celebrate it, makes room for everybody under the rainbow. Is that why so many people seem to be hostile to it?
-
The Bush Crack-Up
Was the President done in by the economy, or by the politics of the economy?
Clip of the Day
ADVERTISEMENT
Robert Rosencrans| 4.21.09 @ 7:55AM
Even in their death spirals, many media sources refuse to acknowledge their problems, blaming it on an allegedly illiterate public.
In a country where free speech and freedom of the press are respected, many forms of reporting have become subjective forms of opinions, which is not news.
I fully expect the New York Times and the Washington Post to crumble or change significantly within the next two years.
Their pages are full of liberal trite, lies about science and misbegotten theories of life. It's a wonder they sell any papers at all.
Pingback| 4.21.09 @ 8:41AM
“Good Riddance” | Babalú Blog: an island on the net without a bearded dictator links to this page. Here’s an excerpt:
Gary Wood| 4.21.09 @ 8:45AM
Oh they'll still sell some papers, you have to have something in which to to wrap the trash.
Anthony| 4.21.09 @ 9:22AM
Mr Srodes; An insightful article, thanks. Can't say I'm too upset, as you say, they have brought this upon themselves.
There is an additional point to their failure; a business cannot succeed if it alienates 1/2 of its potential customers. The MSM have impuned, dismissed and ridiculed conservatives for decades, thinking that we were not needed. Well lo and behold, we are, and as Rev.Wright has said, the chickens have come home to roost. The WP & the NYT are dying a slow and painful death, justice is served. Although we were never welcomed by them, nonetheless, we'll help as pallbearers.
Tom Paine| 4.21.09 @ 10:17AM
This is a fine article.
However, I never seem to be amazed by how many conservatives who seem to get all their "facts" from Rush Limbaugh descry the presence of too much opinion in the press.
If you want good news, by a newspaper.
If you see a story that seems biased or distorted by ideology, write a letter to the editor.
Like no time in the past, these days that editor will listen. Believe me.
It's also important to keep in mind that news editors are NOT the editors that write a paper's editorial page, at least in any paper worth reading. You can't judge a paper by its editorials, which is what I find a great number of people make the mistake of doing.
Alan Brooks| 4.21.09 @ 10:18AM
...and wrap the fish at the Fulton fish market.
Tom Paine| 4.21.09 @ 10:20AM
Robert Rosencranz --
You are correct: the public is not illiterate.
However, the public "learns" what journalism is based upon what journalists do.
Newspapers made a calculated decision to "dumb down" journalism because dumbed down journalism is cheaper to produce. An obsession with profit margins led to unrivalled poor journalistic decisions by management.
If you write good news stories, people will read them.
But the story is more complicated than simply a supposed "liberal bias" ruining newspapers.
Peter McGrath| 4.21.09 @ 10:54AM
Reporting "the news" has always been somewhat of a mystery to me. Telling the audience that there was fire at the Fifth Street Pier is one thing, but reporting on the Administration's gargantuan expansion of government is quite another.
To report such the latter story accurately, the "journalist" will need to have at least some background in economics, history, civics, constitutional law, and public administration. A tall order for anyone, let alone someone who has matriculated from a journalism school. Typically, the journalism major studies the humanities, liberal arts, history, etc., in order to gain a broad perspective. However, most journalism students take 100 or 200 level courses in numerous areas and that's the end of it. No seminar classes, no concentrated study on any one topic, no critical analysis, is typically required of a journalism grad.
The result is a shallow understanding and appreciation of our culture. Toss in a massive dollop of standard issue oppressive liberal bias, and you get someone who is utterly unprepared to report on anything accurately, let alone something as complicated as the Federal budget.
Kevin Killion | 4.21.09 @ 11:09AM
For decades, major newspapers all but ignored the rampant dumbing-down of schools. Maybe once every few YEARS (you can go to ProQuest and confirm this), a newspaper might have a single story about whole language reading, or guesswork and games fuzzy math, or the collapse of serious history, geography and civics into the mind-mush of loosey-goosey social studies, or whizbang science with the substance strained out. The only stories about schools that interested big city dailies were about strikes, more money, asbestos abatement and gangs.
Well, guess what? After decades of ignoring the devastation going on in classrooms, newspapers found that their potential audiences no longer read well, understood numbers, or had much historical perspective.
Worse yet, they started HIRING the products of dumbed-down education swamps, and thus started carrying in-depth investigations into stories like Madonna falling from her horse.
Rather than fostering a climate of knowledge, newspapers ignored the assault on knowledge going on in schools. They should have been the guardians of learning; instead, newspapers assumed (just like parents) that everything was fine as long as schools got more money, and thus left the barbarians to create havoc in educational fads.
The newspapers are now reaping the mess they helped to create.
Bill McClure| 4.21.09 @ 11:28AM
I still rember on 9/11 that the news source I turned to was the internet. If the owner of a newspaper did not recognize how access to news had changed on that day they were totally blind to reality.
Marc Jeric| 4.21.09 @ 11:46AM
Good article, however somewhat late. With my special insight, having escaped from a communist hell lo many years ago, I have been calling the NY Times "The NY Pravda" since the late 1960's.
Aleena| 4.21.09 @ 12:05PM
I live in one of the most conservative cities (77% voted for President Bush in the 2004 election) in this country, yet our paper has been consistently liberal. It also puts inane human interest stories on the front page. Over the years, the font got larger, there were more and larger pictures, and the substantive content decreased.
I recently discovered that I'd kept a paper from the early 80s. Then it was a newspaper; today it's not much of anything. How the paper had declined over the years was disturbing.
A few years ago, I'd had enough and canceled the paper. It's circulation continues to shrink. If anyone thinks the editors care about how their readers think, they are delusional. They are simply interested an telling us how the world should be. Our thoughts, interests, and desires are not important.
Tom Paine| 4.21.09 @ 12:12PM
Bill McClure --
You write that on 9.11 you turned to the "internet" for news.
No, you did not.
You turned to the work of reporters whose reporting is culled from newspapers by internet websites and circulated.
Although there are online news sources, most real reporters still work for traditional news agencies and organizations.
I'll never forget when a NY Times reporter interviewed George and Laura Bush and was surprised to learn how familiar they were with her paper's recent news coverage. She was convinced both read not just the front page, but stories buried inside as well.
I think you'd find that most people who MAKE news, the decision makers in Washington, as well as those who comment on the news (like Rush Limbaugh) all read the New York Times, the Washington Post, etc.
The question is: why don't some of them want YOU to read these news sources.
If someone is telling you not to read something, for whatever reason, distrust that person as you would a poisonous serpent.
Pat| 4.21.09 @ 12:27PM
A beloved story line in our Western mythological foundation is the defeat of evil, but closely coupled with the need to be on guard and ever watchful lest evil return. So, the newspapers got what they so richly deserved, but we must be careful to keep the American public informed less we lose our freedom.
Oh, my brother's hernia and other exclamations of disbelief - if anything, we're inundated with news 24/7 and the up to the minute blab is available in places unthinkable 50 years. You get on a local train for your daily commute, there's a plasticized blonde bimbo or chin lifted anchor twerp reading off the latest events in every railcar. Same thing in the airport terminal, the bus station, the car rental office - it's like the world might end while you're in transit and they don't want you to miss it.
But what about less public venues? Well, there's the health club for instance, guys in the guys locker room walking around buck naked, without apparel and playing in the background - you guessed it - three televisions each tuned to a different channel blaring out the news. Drying off and deordorizing your armpits is accompanied by an analysis of Obama's latest popularity poll, the British prime minister's thoughts on the financial crisis, the latest romantic problems of the current Hollywood idol. The world might end while you're sprinkling talcum powder on some of your more private parts and, once again, you might have missed it.
If anything, we're inundated with too much news. Network folks desperate to avoid dead air will assault you without mercy, newspapers anxious to appeal to the widest audience throwing nonsense stories in every direction. This isn't news, it's babble! And you might lose your freedom for lack of enough babble? What we need are laws restricting where news can be blared and the cumulative hours it can be inflicted on the American public.
Robert Rosencrans| 4.21.09 @ 12:59PM
It doesn't matter whether it's conservatives or liberals lying, the public can see right through it. At this time in our history a preponderance of journalists ascribe to the liberal tenants. This would also indicate that newspapers have done little marketing or offering variety to their customers. Without options and choice, you don't have a customer base, you have the end, because you have no sustainable business model.
Obama Rules| 4.21.09 @ 1:56PM
Marc Jeric, where did you escape from?
Becky| 4.21.09 @ 4:40PM
Trains don't have cabooses anymore, yet they still manage to go down the track. That little red blinking light on the last car has replaced the charming caboose.
I myself am fascinated by the Kindle 2, but the current cost seems a little out of my budget, and I am waiting to see how much censorship takes place in the next few years, whether even that will be worth it.
Thom| 4.21.09 @ 5:16PM
Many fine points but one point that is equally important that is missing and lays at the foundation of our general society decline. Competition in a free market place. Not only have Newspapers alienated a substantial portion of their paying customers they have attempted to stifle any and all competition within the market they serve. When the Newspapers were “king” there tended to be several dailies in every major city, now there is typically one. This trend to monopolize the “news” started long before the Internet was even a word. Same for the Nightly News, NBC, ABC and CBS haven’t really competed for content in decades. The difference is a matter of degree not quality of output. Mind num robots don’t care but they don’t tend to be the ones buying the papers to take advantage of the Ads and “coupons”. Most News is boring to say the least. It is often presented as entertainment which trivializes it to no end. I believe this was called “authority” by the author of this piece. I turned off Network News during the middle of the First Gulf war for good because the so called Journalists couldn’t tell the difference between a Cruise missile, a Patriot and a Marwick. As “subject matter experts” they simply don’t have it and their lame attempts to compensate for their wide scale ignorance by hiring retired military people to “pinch” hit doesn’t help. Competition produces the best quality product or service for the least possible price in simple economic terms. The News business in general, simply won’t compete with each other thus they produce the lowest quality product or service at the highest possible price. You can’t produce a wide range of quality journalism if you don’t have a wide and deep reservoir of real world knowledge. Competition forces people to step up to the plate and take a swing; We see what Monopolies produce. Fox has the ratings it has because they are willing to compete in the market place of ideas and I don’t have cable TV but know the difference between Fox and the rest should I want to watch them.
ds80| 4.21.09 @ 7:13PM
Let's see: newspaper circulation in steady decline for years. AM talk radio listener-ship in steady increase for years. So who has the better business model? Give your customers what they want, or ride your sanctimonious "we know best" into bankruptcy. I don't hear talk of AM radio station licensees needing a government bailout, but I have heard the same spoken of, about newspapers.
Howard| 4.21.09 @ 9:04PM
I live in the Boston area. The liberal Kennedy shill, The Boston Globe is disintegrating in front of our very eyes. The Sunday magazine is smaller than an insert from Petco. The economy has decimated their classifieds and auto ads. And of course they respond to this crisis by getting rid of more employees, further cheapening the product. It reminds me of Pan Am or Eastern Airlines in their final months. RIP
Obama Drules| 4.22.09 @ 12:02AM
From some commie hell hole where you belong, you putrid little pig, Obama Rules.
Pingback| 4.22.09 @ 12:38AM
Good Riddance links to this page. Here’s an excerpt:
David Govett | 4.22.09 @ 1:14AM
Americans need unbiased information to make rational decisions. It is not found in newspapers. It can be found on the Web. Case closed.
mark in wv| 4.22.09 @ 10:26AM
What about the environmental impact of all that newsprint? How come Al Gore never drones on about THAT?
Richard Baker| 5.2.09 @ 10:39AM
To Mark in WV:
Al Gore drones on because he didn't have the intellectual ability to pass Divinity School. The newspapers are suffering from their playing street theater in newsprint and thinking no one noticed.
John in Phoenix| 5.6.09 @ 12:01PM
And good riddance to your awful column too. Newspapers always have and always will do the legwork for lazy columnists like yourself, to wheeze on with poorly worded opines like this sewage.
Oh, and the Boston Globe will be around for a long, long, long time. Sorry to disappoint you, bitter right wing hack.
LiberalBogeyman| 9.19.09 @ 8:41PM
Ted Turner is going to buy up the NY Times and all the other 'liberal' newspapers, and deliberately run them at a loss to spread liberal propaganda. At the same time, his liberal buddies, people like Bill Gates (spendin' our good American money on foreigners who hate us) will buy up and close down good Republican news services.
Make no mistake, these liberals want to turn America into a hell where poor people get health care and there aren't guns everywhere. Well, we all know where that leads... they'll turn America into a hell-hole like Canada or Australia.