Web Search powered by YAHOO! SEARCH
share
email
font size
options
 
Monday, August 11, 2008

 

It was strangely flattering that several folks in the weird world of journalism reform were mad that I was away from the computer last week and couldn't rant about the great newspaper kerfluffle in this city, about whether certain kinds of news from the Philadelphia Inquirer gets published first on the World Wide Web or on the bark of dead trees. Wrote media guru Jeff Jarvis:  "What a rotten time for Norgman Will Bunch to be on vacation and offline."

Maybe for him; frankly, I was quite happy to be 3,000 miles away from 400 North Broad Street last week. But now, the "Norgman" has returned, and so I guess I'll have to weigh in on this. First of all, David Carr of the New York Times did a good job summarizing the issue this morning:

There is a lesson there for rest of the media, most specifically The Philadelphia Inquirer, where the managing editor, Michael Leary, issued a memo last week suggesting that all of the paper’s good stuff — “signature investigative reporting, enterprise, trend stories, news features and reviews” — would not appear online until they first appear in print.

“For our bloggers, especially, this may require a bit of an adjustment,” Mr. Leary informed the staff. “Some of you like to try out ideas that end up as subjects of stories or columns in print first. If in doubt, consult your editor.”

Even to the eye of this reporter — to use a hack newspaper term — The Inquirer seems to be making a mistake. If the future of our business is online, then why set up a firewall, delaying the best content to protect a legacy product? And more adept reporters are beginning to realize that the Web is not just a way to broadcast news, it is a great way to assemble it as well.

First of all, since there seems to be a lot of confusion around this point, I should remind people that I work for the Daily News and not the Inquirer, and while we may be owned by the same characters, the way that the organization is set up I have as much to do with what happens in their newsroom as with what happens at the Omaha World-Herald. That said, while in one sense I agree wholeheartedly with Jarvis and the harsher critics of the Inquirer, in another unfortunate sense I think the controversy is a tad overblown. Let me explain.

I believe the critics are 100 percent right in the sense that perception is reality, and the retro, 1990s vibe -- and its curmudgeonly undercurrent of hostility toward the Internet -- that Leary's memo set off is exactly the wrong message to be sending from anywhere in the Philadelphia Media Holdings empire. The newsroom needs to project a forward-looking image, and so the widespread perception of the Inquirer as backward-looking is a dangerous thing.

That said, my sense as a regular reader of the Inquirer and Philly.com is that the practical impact of this "new policy" is virtually nil. The sad truth is that there isn't a bold tradition of the Inquirer publishing stories first on the Web that's being eliminated here. If I were Mike Leary, here's what I'd do.

1) Admit that the first memo was a mistake and withdraw it, and thank all the bloggers and other who've commented on it for their positive ideas or suggestions.

2) Convene a newsroom summit on how the Inquirer can better use the Web to systematically enhance and promote stories, not on a false choice of giving them away or not giving them away.

In Carr's NYT article today, the "lesson" that he refers to is how blogging and online video clips of the spectacular Olympics opening ceremony in Beijing didn't undercut NBC's telecast by giving it away for free -- but enhanced it by teasing and exciting people to watch the whole thing in big-screen glory. The same could be true for the Inquirer and the Internet -- selected excepts and blogging or even YouTube style video clips could be used to promote and interest people in what's in tomorrow's print edition, which could then focus on longer-form journalism that works better in hard type.

I understand the passion of Internet enthusiasts who want to kill the newspaper altogether, but many of them are so caught up in their online world that that fail to realize something that seems so illogical to them -- the dead-tree version of the paper continues to bring in A LOT more revenue than the online version, and will continue to do so for the next few years. Thus, a strategy that at least for now continues to think about ways to keep an audience for the print edition but also makes the most of the Internet is one that would actually make sense. It will pay to keep good journalists working while we make this dificult transition. Leary's memo comes off as knee-jerk, but maybe there's still a way to make it a knee jerk in the right direction.

Posted by Will Bunch @ 11:07 AM  Permalink | 9 comments
Comments   
Comment removed.
Posted 11:49 AM, 08/11/2008
bon
Politico is the same way. They are supposed to be nearly all online, but they bring in more than half of their revenue from their print addition. (Lobbying firms pay a hefty premium since the print is read by a lot of DC insiders.) The media just hasn't figured out a way to bring in good money on the internet.
Posted 11:55 AM, 08/11/2008
E Plebnista
...you nailed it will; use the Internet to lead readers into more in depth coverage in the print edition, and stop treating the two (internet and print) as separate when doling out content.
Comment removed.
Comment removed.
Posted 01:50 PM, 08/11/2008
pal
"managing editor, Michael Leary" - obviously need a NEW managing editor. We want more content online, more real-time news online - so find a way to get advertising to pay for that too. There would be more traffic online if philly.com could design a better home page. More news stories "above the fold" = more new page clicks, how difficult is that to understand? Seriously, hire some news-tech savvy people - and some more interesting editorial persons - because right now it's just same-old stuff over and over again.
Comment removed.
Posted 03:21 PM, 08/11/2008
hiester
The Inquirer still has editors?
Posted 10:38 PM, 08/11/2008
Archimedes
I believe that some papers have decided the opposite--breaking news goes online immediately and appears in papers when the print run happens. For news, this makes more sense to me. I don't count on the two newspapers I read daily to give me the latest, which I now get from either my Internet connection or cable 24-hour news. Newspapers give me depth of coverage and columnists and letters to the editor. That kind of stuff probably ought to appear first in print (for the paper's financial reasons only).
9 comments
About Will Bunch
Will's book: Learn about it here and purchase it here.

Will Bunch, a senior writer at the Philadelphia Daily News, blogs about his obsessions, including national and local politics and world affairs, the media, pop music, the Philadelphia Phillies, soccer and other sports, not necessarily in that order.

E-mail Will by clicking here.

PLEASE COMMENT WITH PASSION...

...but not with racial slurs, potentially libelous allegations, obscenities or other juvenile noise. Such comments will, at our discretion, be deleted in their entirety, and repeat offenders will be blocked from commenting. ALSO: Any commenter advocating killing any government official will be immediately banned.

Thanks.

Blog Roll
Philly/National
 
Atrios
 
Kiko's House
 
Suburban Guerilla
 
Booman Tribune
 
All-Spin Zone
 
Philly (Dragonballyee)
 
Afro-Netizen
 
Rowhouse Logic
 
MyDD
 
Bad Attitudes
 
Billmon
 
iFlipFlop
 
CorrenteWire
 
upyernoz
 
Tattered Coat
 
Fables of the Reconstruction
 
Slacktivist
Philly
 
Citizen Mom
 
The Next Mayor
 
Philly Future
 
Philadelphia Will Do
 
Philebrity
 
Young Philly Politics
 
Phillyblog
 
Welcome to Phillyville
 
Phawker
 
A List of Things Thrown Five Minutes Ago
 
Keystone Blog
 
Philadelphia - America's Hometown
 
BlankBaby
 
Above Average Jane
 
Phillyist
 
Metroblogging Philadelphia
 
The Clog
Politics
 
Josh Marshall
 
Daily Kos
 
Juan Cole
 
Oliver Willis
 
Andy Borowitz
 
War and Piece
 
Wonkette
 
BuzzFlash
 
Raw Story
 
Cursor
 
Crooks and Liars
 
Swing State Project
 
Kevin Drum
 
Talk Left
 
AmericaBlog
 
Hullabaloo
 
Mad Kane
 
Think Progress
 
Jesus' General
 
The Carpetbagger Report
 
Majikthise
 
Echidne of the Snakes
 
David Sirota
 
Glenn Greenwald
 
TBogg
 
Fire Dog Lake
 
Taylor Marsh
 
Matthew Yglesias
 
Jon Swift
 
Drudge Report
Sports
 
Beer Leaguer
 
The 700 Level
 
Dick Polman
 
Balls, Sticks and Stuff
 
Shallow Center
 
Philling Station
 
Phillies Nation
 
A Citizen's Blog
 
The Good Phight
Media
 
Romenesko
 
Editor and Publisher
 
Pressthink
 
Buzzmachine
 
The Inksniffer
 
Media Bloodhound
 
Eat the Press
 
Mickey Kaus
 
Media (Huffington Post)
If you must
 
Blinq
 
The Corner
 
Instapundit
 
Andrew Sullivan
 
Free Republic
 
James Taranto
 
Blonde Sagacity
 
ScrappleFace
 
Blogorrhea