Extreme Makeover Continues @ ODN
We read today that the Oshkosh Northwestern wants to dump its national columnists for local ones.
Is this a good thing? A couple of years ago the editors there would have said it was a terrible idea, an abdication of professional standards, a surefire way of polluting political discourse.
But things change, not least the economics of newspapering. A couple of weeks ago Gannett, the parent company of the Northwestern, reported a 2 percent decline in newspaper advertising revenues for the month of October. Classified revenues (the traditional cash cow) at community papers were down even more.
So the Northwestern stands to save a few bucks by switching away from syndicated writers to local ones, who presumably will agree to be paid with a byline and a head shot in the paper.
But I think there is more to the paper's motivation than purely a monetary one, since this move really won't be much of a savings given what syndicated columnists are paid per publication.
I think the paper's editors have come to the conclusion that their future is in citizen journalism, and only partly because of the economic imperatives. According to Alex Hummel:
Well, I think it's a step in the right direction. But where that step will lead is anyone's guess. (A question I have for Alex is what will the paper do if/when its community contributors start actively [OK, more actively] campaigning for office? Are the forums for "community conversation" or electioneering? Should the paper care?)
In the long run, I think local papers like the Northwestern are going to end up being like credit unions, owned by their customers, who have a say in determining costs, revenues and strategic direction.
But as much as I like credit unions, few of them provide as robust a range of products and services as a full-service bank. We need more.
The newspaper has a special role to play beyond encouraging discussion. It needs to be a watchdog and a critic (and sometimes a cheerleader). This distinctive public service role is what gives it its privileged standing in the community.
At the moment, there is a fair amount of local news that is getting broken in other media outlets (mostly the blogosphere but also shows like Eye on Oshkosh) . Someone who wants to be fully informed about what is going on in Oshkosh cannot rely solely on the local paper.
A lot of the changes at the Northwestern are for the better, but I think a price is being paid in terms of a reduction in bread-and-butter news coverage.
To make its transformation to citizen journalism work, the Northwestern needs to find the right balance between the citizen part and the journalism part.
Is this a good thing? A couple of years ago the editors there would have said it was a terrible idea, an abdication of professional standards, a surefire way of polluting political discourse.
But things change, not least the economics of newspapering. A couple of weeks ago Gannett, the parent company of the Northwestern, reported a 2 percent decline in newspaper advertising revenues for the month of October. Classified revenues (the traditional cash cow) at community papers were down even more.
So the Northwestern stands to save a few bucks by switching away from syndicated writers to local ones, who presumably will agree to be paid with a byline and a head shot in the paper.
But I think there is more to the paper's motivation than purely a monetary one, since this move really won't be much of a savings given what syndicated columnists are paid per publication.
I think the paper's editors have come to the conclusion that their future is in citizen journalism, and only partly because of the economic imperatives. According to Alex Hummel:
Is this a good thing?As the newspaper evolves and becomes a higher-tech Swiss army knife of information, one low-tech thing becomes clearer and clearer.
The Oshkosh Northwestern is ultimately your paper.
Folks running the show just make sure everyone gets a fair say, inside and online.
Well, I think it's a step in the right direction. But where that step will lead is anyone's guess. (A question I have for Alex is what will the paper do if/when its community contributors start actively [OK, more actively] campaigning for office? Are the forums for "community conversation" or electioneering? Should the paper care?)
In the long run, I think local papers like the Northwestern are going to end up being like credit unions, owned by their customers, who have a say in determining costs, revenues and strategic direction.
But as much as I like credit unions, few of them provide as robust a range of products and services as a full-service bank. We need more.
The newspaper has a special role to play beyond encouraging discussion. It needs to be a watchdog and a critic (and sometimes a cheerleader). This distinctive public service role is what gives it its privileged standing in the community.
At the moment, there is a fair amount of local news that is getting broken in other media outlets (mostly the blogosphere but also shows like Eye on Oshkosh) . Someone who wants to be fully informed about what is going on in Oshkosh cannot rely solely on the local paper.
A lot of the changes at the Northwestern are for the better, but I think a price is being paid in terms of a reduction in bread-and-butter news coverage.
To make its transformation to citizen journalism work, the Northwestern needs to find the right balance between the citizen part and the journalism part.
1 Comments:
So far, what they have been running on the editorial page is, to be polite, garbage. The snippets from the discussions on the message boards are trivial and annoying.
Why do I care what a bunch of semi-informed gripers think about local politics?
Post a Comment
<< Home