As the lonely conservative voice in the Big Apple, you'd expect the New York Sun would be all over the death of William F. Buckley Jr.
They didn't disappoint, with a humongous AP photo on the front page, which accompanied a long obit, editorial by neocon Sun founder Seth Lipsky, an excerpt from an early Buckley book and an op-ed from American Spectator founder, Sun contributing editor and Buckley groupie R. Emmett Tyrrell Jr.
Tyrrell was friends with Buckley for 40 years, so a reverent and eloquent paean to the man was to be expected. More jolting, however, was the next to last line of his piece.
"And so the baton is passed. On the conservative side it passes from Buckley to Ann Coulter."
It does?
If so, it probably tells you as much about the conservative movement as you need to know.
Thursday, February 28, 2008
Monday, February 25, 2008
IFBA vs. IFMD
When Ben Met Jimmy
You just knew Jimmy Kimmel wasn't going to give his squeeze Sarah Silverman the last word in the Matt Damon sweepstakes.
And we're all the better off for it, as the nine jillion people who will watch it online -- and those still awake when it was on last night -- shall attest.
You just knew Jimmy Kimmel wasn't going to give his squeeze Sarah Silverman the last word in the Matt Damon sweepstakes.
And we're all the better off for it, as the nine jillion people who will watch it online -- and those still awake when it was on last night -- shall attest.
Don't Make a TV Critic Cranky on Oscar Night
New York Post's Adam Buckman Pissed He Had To Stay Up Late to Review Oscars, and He Makes Sure Jon Stewart Knows
The life of a TV critic? Pretty cushy. The networks send you advance screening copies. You watch them at your leisure, more or less, then you bang out a review.
Sure, a lot of what you watch sucks, but it still beats working night rewrite or being holed up in police headquarters waiting for something to happen.
But occasionally you might be called upon to review something that's live and crank out something pithy on deadline. Adam Buckman of The New York Post had to do that for the Oscars last night. Thumbnail assessment: thumbs down (note: online and print editions are somewhat different).
Buckman had it in for Jon Stewart and his mild political shtick -- no big surprise given the Post's right-wing stances and Stewart's usual skewering of same. Buckman got all hot and bothered about such quips as: "Oscar is 80 this year, which makes him now automatically the front-runner for the Republican nomination."
Was last night one of Stewart's best moments? Hardly, but more than enough to make you forget David Letterman and Whoopi Goldberg if not Billy Crystal.
And while Buckman was correct about the ceremony having the perennial stink of self-congratulation, he did demonstrate he probably needs to turn off the TV once in a while and get out more.
"[Stewart] never directly acknowledged what many of us at home were thinking, which was that, as a group, this year's nominated films stunk so badly that few of us were actually interested in going out and seeing them."
Actually, many film critics were lamenting how tough it was to pick top-10 lists last year because of the bumper crop of movies made here and abroad. And since when does box-office success equate with Oscar worthiness?
For example, raise your hand if you went to see that movie about Edith Piaf, "La Vie en Rose," the film for which Marion Cotillard won a Best Actress Oscar last night," Buckman screeches. "
Edith who? Marion who? I figured as much."
So, he never heard of Edith Piaf and all movies with subtitles bite the big one. Nothing like an informed critic to rile up the masses.
By Buckman's standard, "Saw III," "Norbit" and "Transformers" should instead by vying for Best Picture. Obviously, he's more than a little peeved about the ending for "No Country for Old Men." But that's no reason to take a dump on all of moviedom,
And about that Stewart joke? Betcha McCain got a few guffaws out of that, provided he hadn't already turned in for the night. Buckman reads like he wishes he could've done the same.
The life of a TV critic? Pretty cushy. The networks send you advance screening copies. You watch them at your leisure, more or less, then you bang out a review.
Sure, a lot of what you watch sucks, but it still beats working night rewrite or being holed up in police headquarters waiting for something to happen.
But occasionally you might be called upon to review something that's live and crank out something pithy on deadline. Adam Buckman of The New York Post had to do that for the Oscars last night. Thumbnail assessment: thumbs down (note: online and print editions are somewhat different).
Buckman had it in for Jon Stewart and his mild political shtick -- no big surprise given the Post's right-wing stances and Stewart's usual skewering of same. Buckman got all hot and bothered about such quips as: "Oscar is 80 this year, which makes him now automatically the front-runner for the Republican nomination."
Was last night one of Stewart's best moments? Hardly, but more than enough to make you forget David Letterman and Whoopi Goldberg if not Billy Crystal.
And while Buckman was correct about the ceremony having the perennial stink of self-congratulation, he did demonstrate he probably needs to turn off the TV once in a while and get out more.
"[Stewart] never directly acknowledged what many of us at home were thinking, which was that, as a group, this year's nominated films stunk so badly that few of us were actually interested in going out and seeing them."
Actually, many film critics were lamenting how tough it was to pick top-10 lists last year because of the bumper crop of movies made here and abroad. And since when does box-office success equate with Oscar worthiness?
For example, raise your hand if you went to see that movie about Edith Piaf, "La Vie en Rose," the film for which Marion Cotillard won a Best Actress Oscar last night," Buckman screeches. "
Edith who? Marion who? I figured as much."
So, he never heard of Edith Piaf and all movies with subtitles bite the big one. Nothing like an informed critic to rile up the masses.
By Buckman's standard, "Saw III," "Norbit" and "Transformers" should instead by vying for Best Picture. Obviously, he's more than a little peeved about the ending for "No Country for Old Men." But that's no reason to take a dump on all of moviedom,
And about that Stewart joke? Betcha McCain got a few guffaws out of that, provided he hadn't already turned in for the night. Buckman reads like he wishes he could've done the same.
A Trainwreck of a PR Disaster for American Airlines
First Woman Is Denied Oxygen, Then Plane Supposedly Doesn't Have Any --- Result: Dead Passenger, Cannon Fodder For Hungry Media
You can be sure the PR staff at American Airlines is walking a perilous tightrope this morning.
On the one hand, you don't want to appear callous when a passenger dies on one of your flights, as Carine Desir of New York did Friday on a Haiti-JFK run after complaining she couldn't breathe.
At the same time, the airline is facing accusations that two oxygen tanks were empty and a defibrillator that could have saved her life wasn't working. Which means the potential for a nasty lawsuit is high.
Conclusions were no doubt drawn by lots of people who watch the story lead off Eyewitness News on WABC-TV right after the Oscars, which features an interview with the woman's tearful cousin, who was on the plane with her when she died.
All American would initially say Sunday was that doctors and nurses on the plane tried to save Desir. But first came another PR bombshell -- Desir had asked a flight attendant for oxygen and was initially refused. That was followed by allegations that all the medical equipment on the 757 was faulty, which American is denying, as the Airline Biz Blog in the Dallas Morning News notes:
We are investigating this incident, as we do with all serious medical situations on board our aircraft, but American Airlines can say oxygen was administered and the Automatic External Defibrillator was applied.
Among the preflight duties of our highly trained Flight Attendants is a check of all emergency equipment on the aircraft. This includes checking the oxygen bottles -- there were 12 in this particular aircraft.
We stand behind the actions and training of our crew and the functionality of the onboard medical equipment.
But nothing about the flight attendant who turned down Desir and relented only after other passengers spoke up.
While it's probably not a good idea for American to get into a he-said-airline-said battle, it's also vitally important to provide an on-camera spokesperson to at least explain what kind of equipment is onboard, emergency SOPs and that crew members are trained for these situations.
That can be done without having to refute address the actual incident except to say that all protocols were followed, assuming that's actually the case.
A prepared statement is no longer enough. By giving Desir's family unfettered access to
local media, especially in the New York market, you risk losing any control of the story, which can get very expensive when it comes time to settle the lawsuit that's sure to be filed in the days ahead.
Thursday, February 21, 2008
Real Information or Advertorial? The Daily News Makes It Hard To Decide
Mount Sinai Medical Center May Be Happy. So What If It's Shoddy Reporting?
Admittedly, I'm more of a reader of the New York Daily News online nowadays than in print. But I picked up a copy of the paper yesterday to help pass the time during a flight and stumbled upon what looked like an advertorial, similar to two others that were in the paper.
But on closer examinaton, there was no disclaimer like "advertising supplement to The Daily News" attached.
Instead, it was full-fledged article about sleep apnea by Katie Charles for what purports to be a regular column called "The Daily Checkup," which is actually weekly.
The problem: while there's lots of information about sleep apnea, its symptoms and risks, it quotes throughout but one doctor, Allison Schecter of Mount Sinai Hospital, who also gets a rather out-sized photo in the middle of the one-page spread.
No disputing Schecter's bona fides, but since when does an alleged health reporter content herself with a single source? And why would one or more editors think that was also OK?
This wasn't an aberration. On Feb. 13, Charles wrote an article about heart disease with a single source from, you guessed it, Mount Sinai, complete with big picture. It even had a fluffy headline -- A Mount Sinai cardiologist makes sure your heart's in the right place.
The hospital didn't have to buy an ad, it had the News write one up for them in the guise of an article. Just doctor ordered, maybe, but an editor?
What gives, if not just the fact the Charles and her editors are extremely lazy? There's no sign or disclaimer that the News and Mount Sinai are working together on a health series, a dubious proposition in and of itself. But if so, it's an arrangement that should be disclosed.
If it's just a coinky-dink that two Mount Sinai docs are profiled, fine. But there's nothing wrong with a little shoe leather on the health beat, just like what's demanded at the News by those working in the police shack, covering the Yankees or Bloomberg.
Having a single source means you're not getting the whole story, no matter how authoritative the source. It's a hospital flack's wet dream, which usually equates to lousy journalism.
In its current form, The Daily Checkup should check out.
Admittedly, I'm more of a reader of the New York Daily News online nowadays than in print. But I picked up a copy of the paper yesterday to help pass the time during a flight and stumbled upon what looked like an advertorial, similar to two others that were in the paper.
But on closer examinaton, there was no disclaimer like "advertising supplement to The Daily News" attached.
Instead, it was full-fledged article about sleep apnea by Katie Charles for what purports to be a regular column called "The Daily Checkup," which is actually weekly.
The problem: while there's lots of information about sleep apnea, its symptoms and risks, it quotes throughout but one doctor, Allison Schecter of Mount Sinai Hospital, who also gets a rather out-sized photo in the middle of the one-page spread.
No disputing Schecter's bona fides, but since when does an alleged health reporter content herself with a single source? And why would one or more editors think that was also OK?
This wasn't an aberration. On Feb. 13, Charles wrote an article about heart disease with a single source from, you guessed it, Mount Sinai, complete with big picture. It even had a fluffy headline -- A Mount Sinai cardiologist makes sure your heart's in the right place.
The hospital didn't have to buy an ad, it had the News write one up for them in the guise of an article. Just doctor ordered, maybe, but an editor?
What gives, if not just the fact the Charles and her editors are extremely lazy? There's no sign or disclaimer that the News and Mount Sinai are working together on a health series, a dubious proposition in and of itself. But if so, it's an arrangement that should be disclosed.
If it's just a coinky-dink that two Mount Sinai docs are profiled, fine. But there's nothing wrong with a little shoe leather on the health beat, just like what's demanded at the News by those working in the police shack, covering the Yankees or Bloomberg.
Having a single source means you're not getting the whole story, no matter how authoritative the source. It's a hospital flack's wet dream, which usually equates to lousy journalism.
In its current form, The Daily Checkup should check out.
Knicks Sink To A New Low In The New York Times
New York-area basketball fans have pretty much thrown in the towel on this season. The Knicks have been one bad joke without a punchline.
The Nets: well, they're the Nets and they're in New Jersey. Despite being for years the best local and more-interesting team to watch, The New York Times decided they were no longer worthy of a beat writer and only cover home games with whatever reporter doesn't have anything else to do at night. On the road, it's the A.P. or bust.
The Knicks beat reporter at the time is Howard Beck, who reliably covers a team that keeps finding new ways to define pathetic. Beck has been with them home and away, serving more as the chronicler of the soap opera called As Isiah Turns, than reporting on meaningless games.
Yet, there he wasn't in today's Times.
Beck was instead dispatched to the Meadowlands to cover the overtime thriller won by the Nets, for the first time without Jason Kidd, who was traded to the Dallas Mavericks.
Instead, it was the Knicks who got the wire-service treatment. The Times couldn't even muster a stringer for the game. Maybe just as well. The Knicks lost by 40 points to the Philadelphia 76ers.
But that the Times wasn't there to record the carnage was telling, not just of the trainwreck of a team, but the ever-tightening budget at the sports department, which has already decimated its hockey coverage, despite having three local teams in playoff contention.
If the assumption is that now that spring training is started, New Yorkers no longer care about any other sport, well, that's a lousy assumption, and one of many poor judgments by the Times, whose chieftains may like to think they consistently put out an eclectic, thorough sports report.
Again, a lousy assumption.
The Nets: well, they're the Nets and they're in New Jersey. Despite being for years the best local and more-interesting team to watch, The New York Times decided they were no longer worthy of a beat writer and only cover home games with whatever reporter doesn't have anything else to do at night. On the road, it's the A.P. or bust.
The Knicks beat reporter at the time is Howard Beck, who reliably covers a team that keeps finding new ways to define pathetic. Beck has been with them home and away, serving more as the chronicler of the soap opera called As Isiah Turns, than reporting on meaningless games.
Yet, there he wasn't in today's Times.
Beck was instead dispatched to the Meadowlands to cover the overtime thriller won by the Nets, for the first time without Jason Kidd, who was traded to the Dallas Mavericks.
Instead, it was the Knicks who got the wire-service treatment. The Times couldn't even muster a stringer for the game. Maybe just as well. The Knicks lost by 40 points to the Philadelphia 76ers.
But that the Times wasn't there to record the carnage was telling, not just of the trainwreck of a team, but the ever-tightening budget at the sports department, which has already decimated its hockey coverage, despite having three local teams in playoff contention.
If the assumption is that now that spring training is started, New Yorkers no longer care about any other sport, well, that's a lousy assumption, and one of many poor judgments by the Times, whose chieftains may like to think they consistently put out an eclectic, thorough sports report.
Again, a lousy assumption.
Monday, February 18, 2008
Good Morning America Goes For The Lump In The Throat Without Pandering
Your Three Words Segment A Challenge For Viewers, But In a Good Way
Time to catch up with the "Your Three Words" segment on the Saturday edition of "Good Morning America" if you haven't already.
The concept is deceptively simple. Viewers send in videos of them holding up a sign with three words that sum up how they're feeling or what is most important in their lives. The montage is then set to some tender music like Wilco's "Sky Blue Sky" or "Drive Slow," from Tiki Lewis.
In so doing we have a woman whose head's wrapped in a kerchief proclaiming "I'm cancer free," or a picture of a child that says "Daddy's comin' home" from a military tour, followed by another one that says "Mama's goin' next."
Or, three one-word signs from a girl that say "Locks of Love," as her hair is cut. And then there was the simple "We miss you" that preceded an ultrasound of a fetus.
The segments make you smile. They provide lumps in the throat. And don't be surprised to find tears welling up.
It's the ultimate human-interest story. It's not conventional journalism, but it's not supposed to be. In this case, that's not a problem. It's what makes the segment great.
In the spirit of "Your Three Words," all I can tell you is Watch. This. Saturday.
Thursday, February 14, 2008
Valentine's Day Special: Jimmy Kimmel Gets Surprise from Sarah Silverman
Turns Out She's Found A New Oscar-Winning Beau, and They're a YouTube Sensation
Yeah, yeah, I'm late to the party with this clip, but if you haven't seen Sarah Silverman's raunchy ode to doing the nasty with Matt Damon, now's your time to join the millions on You Tube who've partaken over the last two weeks.
And if you have seen it already, then you'll know you'll laugh again.
Watch it with someone you love. Not.
Yeah, yeah, I'm late to the party with this clip, but if you haven't seen Sarah Silverman's raunchy ode to doing the nasty with Matt Damon, now's your time to join the millions on You Tube who've partaken over the last two weeks.
And if you have seen it already, then you'll know you'll laugh again.
Watch it with someone you love. Not.
Russ Stanton: Next Lamb Being Led To The Slaughter?
Why Is This Man Smiling?
I'm not sure whether to congratulate Russ Stanton for being named the next editor of The Los Angeles Times, or to feel sorry for him.
Stanton gets to become the third editor in less than three years at what is still one of the nation's top newspapers, despite Tribune's best efforts.
And he takes the helm just a day after publisher David Hiller announced up to 150 job cuts at the Los Angeles Times Media Group.
Stanton, a 10-year Times veteran who most-recently served as Innovation Editor, has no choice but to play the role of good soldier.
Hiller, as shown by the ouster of
Stanton's predecessor, James O'Shea, will likely keep Stanton on a short leash. That smile you see above could be quickly wiped out if the Times is asked to make a disproportionate sacrifice to help pay down Sam Zell's debt service.
Still, Stanton may be the one who is in the best position to meld the print and online versions, which could very well determine the future viability of the paper, as it continues to hemorrhage readers and advertisers as the California economy grinds to a standstill.
For now, I'm skeptical about how much he can accomplish given the Sisyphean task that awaits. But if you care at all about quality newspapers, you have no choice but to root for him. Every other editor and reporter at the Times would do well to follow suit.
Good News For the Daily News, But Really Bad Copy
Item About All-Color Presses A Little Too Colorful
The Daily News in New York has never been shy about wearing its heart on its sleeve. You'll never see the journalistic equivalent of a shrinking violet on the copy desk.
That's not always for the better, especially when they feel Rupert Murdoch's flame lapping at their butts and they try to out-Post the Post.
So, a bit of hype about the News' eventual move to printing the entire paper in color by next year should be expected.
Not to be expected was the florid prose that I sure as hell nobody on the city desk actually wrote and was instead left to one of the newspaper's over-eager flacks.
The first two paragraphs set the sorry tone:
The Daily News is writing a new colorful chapter in its storied history with the announcement today that it will build America's most modern newspaper print center!
By the end of 2009, the Daily News will be produced in 100% color on new industry-leading presses, guaranteeing and reinforcing its future as the country's leading tabloid and enabling its millions of readers to enjoy the city's first major daily newspaper in full color.
Cue barf bag.
How hard would it have been for a News reporter to write even-handedly about this admittedly significant event without serving as a shill.?
I did it as a reporter for the Bergen Record some 19 years ago, when I was assigned to cover the opening of the paper's newest plant in Rockaway, N.J.
Did I feel a little weird interviewing publisher Mac Borg about his new baby? Did he seem a bit bemused that someone from his paper was doing something besides offering hearty congratulations? Yes, on both accounts.
But I covered the event like I would any other story, nor would it have been expected or accepted that I would do otherwise.
Then again, Mort Zuckerman's ego, from all I can gather, is considerably more out-sized than Borg, not exactly the meekest of men. Amid all the hoopla, Zuckerman was too busy patting himself on the back to sanction putting real news in The News.
The Daily News in New York has never been shy about wearing its heart on its sleeve. You'll never see the journalistic equivalent of a shrinking violet on the copy desk.
That's not always for the better, especially when they feel Rupert Murdoch's flame lapping at their butts and they try to out-Post the Post.
So, a bit of hype about the News' eventual move to printing the entire paper in color by next year should be expected.
Not to be expected was the florid prose that I sure as hell nobody on the city desk actually wrote and was instead left to one of the newspaper's over-eager flacks.
The first two paragraphs set the sorry tone:
The Daily News is writing a new colorful chapter in its storied history with the announcement today that it will build America's most modern newspaper print center!
By the end of 2009, the Daily News will be produced in 100% color on new industry-leading presses, guaranteeing and reinforcing its future as the country's leading tabloid and enabling its millions of readers to enjoy the city's first major daily newspaper in full color.
Cue barf bag.
How hard would it have been for a News reporter to write even-handedly about this admittedly significant event without serving as a shill.?
I did it as a reporter for the Bergen Record some 19 years ago, when I was assigned to cover the opening of the paper's newest plant in Rockaway, N.J.
Did I feel a little weird interviewing publisher Mac Borg about his new baby? Did he seem a bit bemused that someone from his paper was doing something besides offering hearty congratulations? Yes, on both accounts.
But I covered the event like I would any other story, nor would it have been expected or accepted that I would do otherwise.
Then again, Mort Zuckerman's ego, from all I can gather, is considerably more out-sized than Borg, not exactly the meekest of men. Amid all the hoopla, Zuckerman was too busy patting himself on the back to sanction putting real news in The News.
Tuesday, February 12, 2008
Accuweather, Schmackuweather
Doesn't Really Matter What The Forecast Is When Jim Kosek Gets On A Roll
As I sit here tonight in an Albuquerque hotel hearing how lousy the weather is back home in New York, I shuttle between weather.com and accuweather.com for any glimmer of hope that a winter monsoon won't wash any hope of landing tomorrow at LaGuardia, never a sure thing even when it's sunny out.
For its 90-second online video forecast, forecaster Jim Kosek can often be found doing the New York edition. Which means you can get shtick along with a cold front, as we did tonight.
"What ticks me off?" Kosek says. "What crawls up my backside?
Then he bellows, "WHAT GETS ME FIRED UP? Can't be just snow. Can't be just ice or flooding rain. It has to be a combination of everything." And he doesn't even have to deal with that mess. Kosek's tucked away at Accuweather HQ in State College, PA.
This is also the same guy on New Year's Day who pretended to be too hung over to do a real forecast, or at least assumed most of those watching were too blitzed to care about the weather. Which could very well have been the case.
Give Kosek credit for taking his job seriously if not himself. Now if he could just do something about the weather over LaGuardia....
Tuesday, February 05, 2008
New York Finally Gets A Triple-A Radio Station, Sort Of
Smooth Jazz CD101.9 Bites The Dust, Makes Way for 101.9 RXP
In New York, the nation's most-conservative radio market -- because of the money at stake -- any change in a station's format is a big deal. That's even more so when a station that's played the same kind of music dumps its format without warning.
But so it went at 4 p.m. for CD101.9 , which had been the smooth jazz station in the Big Apple for 20 years.
The perception had been that while the station -- never my cup of tea -- was never gangbusters in the ratings, it attracted the right demographics to bill a healthy-enough amount to satisfy its overseers at Emmis Broadcasting.
But apparently not.
Now it's called 101.9 RXP, and flipped to a Triple-A-esque format that, at first blush, is more active than what can normally be heard at non-commercial WFUV.
A sample of the first hour, as posted on the Web site:
1. The Velvet Underground - Rock 'n' Roll
2. R.E.M. Supernatural Superserious
3. Elvis Costello - Pump It Up
4.Tom Petty - Mary Jane's Last Dance
5.Blondie - Call Me
6.The Bravery - Believe
7.Bruce Springsteen - Blinded By The Light
8.The Flaming Lips - Do You Realize
9.U2 - Angel Of Harlem
10.Nickelback - Rockstar
11.Red Hot Chili Peppers - Zephyr Song
12.The Black Crowes - Hard To Handle
13.The Killers - Somebody Told Me
3. Elvis Costello - Pump It Up
4.Tom Petty - Mary Jane's Last Dance
5.Blondie - Call Me
6.The Bravery - Believe
7.Bruce Springsteen - Blinded By The Light
8.The Flaming Lips - Do You Realize
9.U2 - Angel Of Harlem
10.Nickelback - Rockstar
11.Red Hot Chili Peppers - Zephyr Song
12.The Black Crowes - Hard To Handle
13.The Killers - Somebody Told Me
Of course, it's early and the format will be subject to tweaking. First tweak: Anything by Nickelback, which doesn't fit into any incarnation of a Triple-A format.
Nonetheless, having a station like this in the market is most welcome, as rock music on commercial radio in New York has never been more stultifying, save for WFUV and WXPK, in the northern suburbs, which definitely has cause for concern.
The station's promising that it won't be deadened by corporate playlists -- we'll see -- and that it'll actually let its jocks have a big say in what music gets on, sort of hearkening back to the glory days of WNEW-FM.
So far, the only deejay announced is Brian Schock, who most notably was the PD at San Diego's alternative rocker 91X. He'll do PM drive and serve as music director. RXP's program director is CD101.9 holdover Blake Lawrence, a 30-year radio vet albeit one light on rock experience.
"It's unheard of in radio these days, but 101.9 RXP is about the music and not so much the music business - we're merging rock styles and generations into a singular community that we call The New York Rock Experience," Lawrence told FMQB.
The station will also frequently spotlight New York bands, such as The Hold Steady and Nada Surf.
So far, they're saying the right things.
Now they just have to play them.
The Oregonian's Invisible Human-Interest Story
Baffling Policy of Separating Articles and Photos; Sacrificing Clarity for Ad Revenue
Everyone loves a good human-interest story, especially ones about plucky seniors who refuse to be relegated to the rocking chair. It's a great way for editors to deflect the incessant gripes that they only focus on bad news.
One such item appears in The Oregonian about one Vera Wilson, who has worked at the same book and stationery store for 73 years, and has no plans to retire now that she's 90 years young.
Only problem reading the story online: there's no picture of Wilson.
Two ads, yes. Photo of subject of article: no.
Actually, that's not totally correct, in the sense that The Oregonian actually puts on the web its staff photos from that day's paper. If you go to that link, you can find a snap of Wilson, who indeed looks very much the part of a spry nonagenarian.
That pattern repeats itself with other stories. Why separate those elements? The photos are part of the way you tell the story. They're not just there for window dressing. Keep them with the articles, just like you do in print.
Online readers have enough of a collective attention deficit and are challenged for time without The Oregonian making them do more work to read the full package.
Everyone loves a good human-interest story, especially ones about plucky seniors who refuse to be relegated to the rocking chair. It's a great way for editors to deflect the incessant gripes that they only focus on bad news.
One such item appears in The Oregonian about one Vera Wilson, who has worked at the same book and stationery store for 73 years, and has no plans to retire now that she's 90 years young.
Only problem reading the story online: there's no picture of Wilson.
Two ads, yes. Photo of subject of article: no.
Actually, that's not totally correct, in the sense that The Oregonian actually puts on the web its staff photos from that day's paper. If you go to that link, you can find a snap of Wilson, who indeed looks very much the part of a spry nonagenarian.
That pattern repeats itself with other stories. Why separate those elements? The photos are part of the way you tell the story. They're not just there for window dressing. Keep them with the articles, just like you do in print.
Online readers have enough of a collective attention deficit and are challenged for time without The Oregonian making them do more work to read the full package.
Daily News Cancellation of AP Core Services: A Whole Lot of Posturing, But Nothing More
Which is Not To Say Member Gripes Aren't Legit, But Pulling Plug Will Never Be The Answer
Editor & Publisher reported yesterday how The Daily News in New York is a year into its two-year notification to the Associated Press that it would cancel its core services next year.
The official explanation: the DN is peeved over the two-year termination policy and it's pulling up stakes in protest.
AP regional vice president Linda Stowell told E&P the co-op isn't exactly quaking in its boots. Cancellation notices do crop up, but they get resolved and members almost never leave. For the simple reason that they can't.
I mean, they could, but then how do you fill your paper? Sure, you could head over to Reuters and AFP, which is fine if you need to keep up with the latest out of Burkina Faso or Turkmenistan.
Yes, if something big happens in a large population center, correspondents from The Washington Post, McClatchy or Tribune could possibly fill the gap.
But there's no one else to enter the breach consistently when news happens anywhere else, and no one to get it out faster -- all the more important as readers migrate to the Web and stay there.
As media cut back or eliminate bureaus, stop sending reporters on the road to cover teams and get rid of arts critics, they blithely assume the AP will be there to bail them out. And it almost always is.
The AP knows it, so does The Daily News. Which is why the termination notice doesn't herald a paradigm shift for newspapers, nor does it portend a new business model. The wire is actually the one indispensable component in a newsroom. With it, you know you can always fill the paper with something.
Sure, some editors are peeved about AP's new rate structure, which will bolster breaking news to core members, while putting some other services on an a la carte menu.
But all the bitching and moaning will be just that. Editors know they can't leave when there's an 800-ton gorilla sitting on top of their news hole.
Editor & Publisher reported yesterday how The Daily News in New York is a year into its two-year notification to the Associated Press that it would cancel its core services next year.
The official explanation: the DN is peeved over the two-year termination policy and it's pulling up stakes in protest.
AP regional vice president Linda Stowell told E&P the co-op isn't exactly quaking in its boots. Cancellation notices do crop up, but they get resolved and members almost never leave. For the simple reason that they can't.
I mean, they could, but then how do you fill your paper? Sure, you could head over to Reuters and AFP, which is fine if you need to keep up with the latest out of Burkina Faso or Turkmenistan.
Yes, if something big happens in a large population center, correspondents from The Washington Post, McClatchy or Tribune could possibly fill the gap.
But there's no one else to enter the breach consistently when news happens anywhere else, and no one to get it out faster -- all the more important as readers migrate to the Web and stay there.
As media cut back or eliminate bureaus, stop sending reporters on the road to cover teams and get rid of arts critics, they blithely assume the AP will be there to bail them out. And it almost always is.
The AP knows it, so does The Daily News. Which is why the termination notice doesn't herald a paradigm shift for newspapers, nor does it portend a new business model. The wire is actually the one indispensable component in a newsroom. With it, you know you can always fill the paper with something.
Sure, some editors are peeved about AP's new rate structure, which will bolster breaking news to core members, while putting some other services on an a la carte menu.
But all the bitching and moaning will be just that. Editors know they can't leave when there's an 800-ton gorilla sitting on top of their news hole.
Tuesday, January 29, 2008
Silencing Their Own College Paper: Montclair State Student Leaders Flunk Lesson In Governance
1/31 UPDATE: The SGA came to its senses, at least for the time being.
Ron Playing Chicken With the First Amendment; Newspaper Feud Over Open Meetings Leads to Cutoff of Funds
Maybe the unfortunately named Ron Chicken, president of the Student Government Association at Montclair State University in New Jersey, had read too many obits for Suharto, the former Indonesian dictator.
Maybe he didn't get a good grade in one of his political science classes and decided to enact his own brand of government.
Or maybe he's just an idiot.
Either way, for now he's silenced the college's newspaper, The Montclarion, by yanking funding for the first edition of the semester. The paper's been sparring over access to SGA meetings, while the SGA accused the paper of improperly hiring a lawyer who advised the editors on their rights under the state's Open Meetings Law.
Chicken and The Montclairion are unfortunate bedfellows, in that the paper is actually part of the SGA, and depends on it for $16,500 in funding, according to the Bergen Record. It's a longstanding arrangement, and a dangerous one, as The Montclarion has now found out the hard way.
At the four schools where I had some form of higher education, the newspapers were all independent corporations one way or the other, something editor-in-chief Karl de Vries realizes should now be the case.
"If The Montclarion is to act as a watchdog, then it has to be completely independent of the SGA," he told The Record. "If Richard Nixon were running The Washington Post in 1972, then I'm sure we never would have heard about Watergate." (full disclosure: I don't know Karl, but I did work with his Dad for many years at CBS).
Not surprisingly, Chicken is too chicken to talk to the media, continuing his streak of unaccountability.
Beyond muzzling the media, the larger issue is exactly what does the SGA think it has to gain by not granting access to its meetings. After all, it's spending money paid by students who are going to a state university.
Yet somehow, Il Duce, or should I say, Il Pollo and the rest of the poultry running the government at Montclair State believe they're not a public body and subject to scrutiny.
Which is why, of course, you need a newspaper keeping close tabs on their activities. I suspect the SGA's FUBAR move has been enough of a PR disaster for the school that the administration will lean on Chicken & Co. enough to get them to capitulate. And perhaps, then, also order them to take a remedial civics lesson in the process.
Ron Playing Chicken With the First Amendment; Newspaper Feud Over Open Meetings Leads to Cutoff of Funds
Maybe the unfortunately named Ron Chicken, president of the Student Government Association at Montclair State University in New Jersey, had read too many obits for Suharto, the former Indonesian dictator.
Maybe he didn't get a good grade in one of his political science classes and decided to enact his own brand of government.
Or maybe he's just an idiot.
Either way, for now he's silenced the college's newspaper, The Montclarion, by yanking funding for the first edition of the semester. The paper's been sparring over access to SGA meetings, while the SGA accused the paper of improperly hiring a lawyer who advised the editors on their rights under the state's Open Meetings Law.
Chicken and The Montclairion are unfortunate bedfellows, in that the paper is actually part of the SGA, and depends on it for $16,500 in funding, according to the Bergen Record. It's a longstanding arrangement, and a dangerous one, as The Montclarion has now found out the hard way.
At the four schools where I had some form of higher education, the newspapers were all independent corporations one way or the other, something editor-in-chief Karl de Vries realizes should now be the case.
"If The Montclarion is to act as a watchdog, then it has to be completely independent of the SGA," he told The Record. "If Richard Nixon were running The Washington Post in 1972, then I'm sure we never would have heard about Watergate." (full disclosure: I don't know Karl, but I did work with his Dad for many years at CBS).
Not surprisingly, Chicken is too chicken to talk to the media, continuing his streak of unaccountability.
Beyond muzzling the media, the larger issue is exactly what does the SGA think it has to gain by not granting access to its meetings. After all, it's spending money paid by students who are going to a state university.
Yet somehow, Il Duce, or should I say, Il Pollo and the rest of the poultry running the government at Montclair State believe they're not a public body and subject to scrutiny.
Which is why, of course, you need a newspaper keeping close tabs on their activities. I suspect the SGA's FUBAR move has been enough of a PR disaster for the school that the administration will lean on Chicken & Co. enough to get them to capitulate. And perhaps, then, also order them to take a remedial civics lesson in the process.
Suharto's Death Gives Wall Street Journal Chance To Sing Hosannas for Genocidal Dictator
Next Up For Hugo Restall: Stalin Wasn't Such A Bad Guy, After All
The Wall Street Journal's editorial page often gives me a good case of the chuckles. Its pundits will do something, anything, to affirm their ultra-conservative cred, no matter how indefensible the position.
Sometimes that means having to ignore the truth in order to make a point.
Exhibit A crawled out from yesterday's page, in a column by Hugo Restall on the legacy of Suharto, the former Indonesian dictator who finally died over the weekend after being hospitalized earlier this month.
Restall, who is editor of the Far Eastern Economic Review and a member of the Journal editorial board, lauds Suharto for rescuing the country from the pro-Communist grip of his predecessor Sukarno that made him a close U.S. ally; revived a moribund economy, and improved health and education.
Sure, there was the rampant corruption, cronyism and profiteering that may have made Suharto a billionaire that brought Indonesia's economy to its knees and forced him from office. But:
Like Deng Xiaoping, he rescued his country from totalitarianism and poverty, and put it on the path to prosperity and a large measure of personal freedoms. For all his flaws, Suharto deserves to be remembered as one of Asia's greatest leaders.
As proof that Cold Warriors never have to say their sorry, Restall conveniently leaves out any mention of the reign of terror that gripped Indonesia, when the Suharto-led Army was encouraged to whip up a country-wide anti-Communist witch hunt that may have left up to a million people dead.
Restall apparently views whole families being wiped out as collateral damage to justify Suharto's goal to avoid another Vietnam or Cambodia.
Thankfully, a separate Journal editorial, which appears only online, provides some context, never a given at the Journal.
Suharto oversaw the massacre of hundreds of thousands of his countrymen in the anti-Communist purge of the 1965-66 Years of Living Dangerously. Ethnic Chinese were also targeted, and those who survived were forced to renounce their heritage and take Indonesian-sounding names. The East Timorese suffered brutal repression in the 1970s at the hands of Suharto's military.
But even this editorial praises Suharto for steadying Indonesia and instituting the wrenching reforms needed to make it an Asian economic power, as if to equate genocide with tough love.
The true measure of Suharto's legacy will be the blood he spilled that flowed a lot thicker than the oil he exported that left him a rich, greedy and ultimately disgraced autocrat.
The Wall Street Journal's editorial page often gives me a good case of the chuckles. Its pundits will do something, anything, to affirm their ultra-conservative cred, no matter how indefensible the position.
Sometimes that means having to ignore the truth in order to make a point.
Exhibit A crawled out from yesterday's page, in a column by Hugo Restall on the legacy of Suharto, the former Indonesian dictator who finally died over the weekend after being hospitalized earlier this month.
Restall, who is editor of the Far Eastern Economic Review and a member of the Journal editorial board, lauds Suharto for rescuing the country from the pro-Communist grip of his predecessor Sukarno that made him a close U.S. ally; revived a moribund economy, and improved health and education.
Sure, there was the rampant corruption, cronyism and profiteering that may have made Suharto a billionaire that brought Indonesia's economy to its knees and forced him from office. But:
Like Deng Xiaoping, he rescued his country from totalitarianism and poverty, and put it on the path to prosperity and a large measure of personal freedoms. For all his flaws, Suharto deserves to be remembered as one of Asia's greatest leaders.
As proof that Cold Warriors never have to say their sorry, Restall conveniently leaves out any mention of the reign of terror that gripped Indonesia, when the Suharto-led Army was encouraged to whip up a country-wide anti-Communist witch hunt that may have left up to a million people dead.
Restall apparently views whole families being wiped out as collateral damage to justify Suharto's goal to avoid another Vietnam or Cambodia.
Thankfully, a separate Journal editorial, which appears only online, provides some context, never a given at the Journal.
Suharto oversaw the massacre of hundreds of thousands of his countrymen in the anti-Communist purge of the 1965-66 Years of Living Dangerously. Ethnic Chinese were also targeted, and those who survived were forced to renounce their heritage and take Indonesian-sounding names. The East Timorese suffered brutal repression in the 1970s at the hands of Suharto's military.
But even this editorial praises Suharto for steadying Indonesia and instituting the wrenching reforms needed to make it an Asian economic power, as if to equate genocide with tough love.
The true measure of Suharto's legacy will be the blood he spilled that flowed a lot thicker than the oil he exported that left him a rich, greedy and ultimately disgraced autocrat.
Friday, January 25, 2008
"Lost In Beijing" Review Loses Movie's Backstory
Tony Scott Tells Us About The Film, But Nothing About Chinese Censors, Blacklisted Director
The movie "Lost In Beijing" has been making the festival circuits and has now made its way to an art house in New York.
A.O. Scott in The New York Times speaks well of the movie that "in spite of its raw, explicit moments" is "at heart a sturdy morality tale about innocence and corruption, wealth and want, sex and power."
What Scott, surprisingly, makes no mention of, is that three weeks ago, China's film board canceled the film's screening license and blacklisted director Fang Li for two years. The reasons, which Fang disputes is improper promotion, deleted sex scenes making their way online, and showing an unauthorized version at the Berlin Film Festival.
All of this was mentioned in what was ostensibly a review in The New York Sun, where Grady Hendrix took the opposite approach of Scott and focused almost exclusively on the controversy surrounding "Lost In Beijing," rather than the movie itself.
To be fair, Jack Mathews' brief, mixed review in The Daily News, also omitted any mention of the dust-up, as did John Anderson's three-star assessment in Newsday, though Vinny Musetto in the Post alludes to it in his short, thumbs-down review.
Still, these are the kinds of movies that the Times owns the last word on, at least in newspapers. As such, the back story cries out to be mentioned, especially if it appears to be at least as interesting as the movie itself.
Thursday, January 24, 2008
Skin and Bones Where A Newspaper Should Be In Vermont
The Burlington Free Press Looks Severely Malnourished on a Day When It Should Be Fat With Copy -- And Ads
Had some R&R in Vermont last weekend, and while thawing out and waiting for the Patriots-Chargers game to start, I spent a little time reading the Sunday edition of the Burlington Free Press. Put an emphasis on little.
This is ostensibly the flagship newspaper in the Green Mountain State. At the very least, it's the largest, with a daily circulation of about 45,000 and 52,000 on Sunday.
Yet, I couldn't help but feel that anyone who plunked down $1.75 for the Jan. 20 edition was played for a sucker.
Not counting the classifieds, comics, USA Weekend and the circulars, there was a grand total of 36 pages devoted to the other sections. Thirty-six pages. That meant you could wend your way through the paper in no more than 15 minutes or so, assuming you read slowly.
Admittedly, I don't see the Free Press on a regular basis, so I don't know whether this is typical, and if this output is duplicated on a more-desultory scale the other six days of the week. But it wouldn't surprise me.
After all the Freeps is owned by Gannett, where mediocrity and underachievement run rampant chain-wide, despite the best efforts of many editors and reporters.
What I saw was prime cannon fodder to justify why people go online rather than subscribe to a paper. Beyond a few local stories, the Freeps is offering little of value.
The paper has been hit, like all others, with downturns in circulation and ads. Staffing and morale has also reportedly plummeted.
But that's still no excuse for what I saw over the weekend, which basically ensures that any ardent news consumer in northern and central Vermont will feel compelled to plunk down more-serious coin for The New York Times or, perhaps, The Boston Globe.
That'll set 'em back a lot more than $1.75, but chances are good or better it'll be money well-spent.
Had some R&R in Vermont last weekend, and while thawing out and waiting for the Patriots-Chargers game to start, I spent a little time reading the Sunday edition of the Burlington Free Press. Put an emphasis on little.
This is ostensibly the flagship newspaper in the Green Mountain State. At the very least, it's the largest, with a daily circulation of about 45,000 and 52,000 on Sunday.
Yet, I couldn't help but feel that anyone who plunked down $1.75 for the Jan. 20 edition was played for a sucker.
Not counting the classifieds, comics, USA Weekend and the circulars, there was a grand total of 36 pages devoted to the other sections. Thirty-six pages. That meant you could wend your way through the paper in no more than 15 minutes or so, assuming you read slowly.
Admittedly, I don't see the Free Press on a regular basis, so I don't know whether this is typical, and if this output is duplicated on a more-desultory scale the other six days of the week. But it wouldn't surprise me.
After all the Freeps is owned by Gannett, where mediocrity and underachievement run rampant chain-wide, despite the best efforts of many editors and reporters.
What I saw was prime cannon fodder to justify why people go online rather than subscribe to a paper. Beyond a few local stories, the Freeps is offering little of value.
The paper has been hit, like all others, with downturns in circulation and ads. Staffing and morale has also reportedly plummeted.
But that's still no excuse for what I saw over the weekend, which basically ensures that any ardent news consumer in northern and central Vermont will feel compelled to plunk down more-serious coin for The New York Times or, perhaps, The Boston Globe.
That'll set 'em back a lot more than $1.75, but chances are good or better it'll be money well-spent.
Philadelphia Newspapers See Real Side of Brian Tierney -- Again
Is Situation At Inquirer More Chicken Little Than Cloverfield? What A Difference Two Months Make
The latest blather emanating from Philadelphia Newspapers grand poobah Brian Tierney is that the Inquirer and Daily News need to cut expenses by 10 percent or else he and his investors will be in deep doo-doo with the banks that made his $562 million purchase possible.
So, of course, Tierney -- never a friend of organized labor -- is pointing his fingers at the union and telling them that they need to be a part of whatever draconian solution is agreed to. Forgive the unions if they're weary of this routine.
After all, it was Tierney who cut 17 percent of the newsroom staff in 2006 after threatening worse reductions if the unions didn't cave and give him a myriad of concesssions.
This is the same Tierney who was pumping his chest last April when circulation at the Inquirer inched up 0.6 percent, remarkable at a time when other big-city dailies were hemorrhaging readers.
“It’s about setting out an optimistic vision, it’s about focusing on quality in everything that we do—first and foremost journalistically,” Tierney told the Columbia Journalism Review.
As recently as November, weekday Inky circulation rose 2.3 percent, the largest increase of the 50-biggest newspapers, though Sunday circulation fell. Still, Tierney called the figures "better than I would have hoped."
So which Tierney are we to believe now? He has a long history of talking a good game, but he's given the unions no reason to trust him, and it doesn't appear they will start now.
Indeed, observers like Alan Mutter, who says it's up to newspaper employees to get creative and figure out ways to save money -- and while they're at it, don't kill the messenger -- miss the point.
Tierney and his ilk -- at papers in Minneapolis and San Jose, among others -- have engendered such a high level of animosity in the newsroom, not to mention advertising and circulation departments, where any hope of a collaborative solution is all but lost. So would you if you've been victimized by slash-and-burn methods of expense cutting.
True, it's not Tierney's fault that advertising is down and readership has followed suit. It's an epidemic that's gripped every newspaper. But when he looks to prop up his bottom line he needs to walk past the newsroom and search elsewhere. He's already shed a lot of the reasons people needed to buy his papers. Anything more, and Tierney might as well hand over the keys to the banks.
Instead of simply looking to the unions he despises, it's Tierney who's the one who should be creative. It's time to put all those years he spent as a flack to good use and spin his way out of this predicament.
Tuesday, January 22, 2008
Is Sam Zell Already Speaking With A Forked Tongue?
Giving Tribune Managers Autonomy Could Be Way To Give Him Cover When Tough Decisions Are Made, As James O'Shea Finds Out
The Sam Zell honeymoon may be coming to a crashing thud, now that James O'Shea has been shown the door at The Los Angeles Times.
Zell, the new chieftain of Tribune, said he was firmly behind the decision by Times Publisher David Hiller to replace O'Shea after just 14 months at the helm.
In a rare public bout of he said-he said O'Shea said he was fired. Hiller called it a mutual decision, though he told The Wall Street Journal "at some point it is more semantic. The fact is we didn't see eye-to-eye."
Whatever.
O'Shea lasted 14 months, after coming to Los Angeles from the Chicago Tribune, where he had been a good corporate soldier without eviscerating the newsroom.
But the X factor is ultimately Zell, who said all the right things when he formally took control of Tribune last month.
To wit:
"I'm sick and tired of listening to everybody talk about and commiserate over the end of newspapers. "They ain't ended and they're not going to end. I think they have a great future."
"If you look at my track record, I haven't spent much time disassembling anything, and I've spent my entire career building things."
But Zell also made no secret that he would return local control to Tribune properties, rather than trying to have beancounters in Chicago micro-manage the media empire. Which leads us back to Hiller, who is no dummy and knows that he'll be in charge only so long as he can right the Times' listing ship.
Inevitably, that means even more expense cuts, staff reductions and a shrinking newspaper. That meant exit O'Shea, who knows you don't reverse a paper's fortunes (and don't forget the Times still has a double-digit profit margin) by cutting out its heart.
What remains to be seen is whether Zell -- amid all his bombast -- and Hiller can be persuaded to feel the same way.
The Sam Zell honeymoon may be coming to a crashing thud, now that James O'Shea has been shown the door at The Los Angeles Times.
Zell, the new chieftain of Tribune, said he was firmly behind the decision by Times Publisher David Hiller to replace O'Shea after just 14 months at the helm.
In a rare public bout of he said-he said O'Shea said he was fired. Hiller called it a mutual decision, though he told The Wall Street Journal "at some point it is more semantic. The fact is we didn't see eye-to-eye."
Whatever.
O'Shea lasted 14 months, after coming to Los Angeles from the Chicago Tribune, where he had been a good corporate soldier without eviscerating the newsroom.
But the X factor is ultimately Zell, who said all the right things when he formally took control of Tribune last month.
To wit:
"I'm sick and tired of listening to everybody talk about and commiserate over the end of newspapers. "They ain't ended and they're not going to end. I think they have a great future."
"If you look at my track record, I haven't spent much time disassembling anything, and I've spent my entire career building things."
But Zell also made no secret that he would return local control to Tribune properties, rather than trying to have beancounters in Chicago micro-manage the media empire. Which leads us back to Hiller, who is no dummy and knows that he'll be in charge only so long as he can right the Times' listing ship.
Inevitably, that means even more expense cuts, staff reductions and a shrinking newspaper. That meant exit O'Shea, who knows you don't reverse a paper's fortunes (and don't forget the Times still has a double-digit profit margin) by cutting out its heart.
What remains to be seen is whether Zell -- amid all his bombast -- and Hiller can be persuaded to feel the same way.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)