It’s a big mess here at JimmyCsays this morning.
At midnight, I launched a grandiose post proclaiming a big jump in circulation for The Kansas City Star in a new circulation report.
Problem is I was looking at the wrong set of numbers. In the erroneous post, I said The Star’s circulation was back above 300,000 on Sunday and that average daily circulation was just shy of 200,000.
That would have been a monstrous increase from the 275,784 Sunday circulation and 183,307 daily circulation reported last fall.
As I say, though, I misread the report. The correct numbers for the period that ended March 31 are 280,790 for Sunday and 189,283 daily.
The slight upswing is mildly good news for The Star and its readers but nothing to merit the headline I gave it (KC Star circulation rebounds…Break out the hats and hooters).
I want to extend a big Thank You! to Alex Parker, who operates the MediaKC blog. He wrote about the circulation increase yesterday, and he called the error to my attention a few minutes after midnight. I immediately took it down. That’s why the link in the e-mail message that JimmyC subscribers received early today did not link to a new post.
I sincerely apologize for the error and confusion.
***
Having dragged you through the muddy tracks that I left earlier, I’m not going to leave you without some news. And, to me, this is very good news…
The specter of a sale of North Kansas City Hospital appears to have gone away, thanks to a new mayor, some new City Council members and aggressive action by state Rep. Jay Swearingen and state Sen. Ryan Silvey.
The Star reported yesterday that the new mayor, Don Stielow, and four newly elected City Council members — all opposed to a sale — had sent a letter to Gov. Jay Nixon saying they support a recently passed bill that would make a sale very difficult.
The bill — which Swearingen and Silvey introduced and which is now awaiting Gov. Jay Nixon’s signature — would allow a sale only if the City Council and the hospital’s board of trustees agreed. And even then, it would take a vote of North Kansas City residents.
On a related issue, The Star’s story, written by business reporter Steve Everly, said Mayor Stielow is also interested in a possible sale of the sprawling, 96,000-square-foot North Kansas City Community Center, which was built with casino revenue but now runs at an annual deficit of about $1 million a year.
(By way of comparison regarding size and scale, the 10-story Argyle Building at 12th and McGee in downtown Kansas City consists of 117,000 square feet.)
Given the city’s compromised financial situation, it seems like selling the community center is the way to go. It’s a great facility, from what I hear, but too big for a city with an annual budget of about $43 million.
Luckily, it appears that the city will keep its crown jewel and eventually sell its bauble.
***
Thanks for your patronage, readers…And Go (Keep Going) Royals!
JimmyCsays: At the juncture of journalism and daily life in KC 
Thanks for the clarification as I wondered…. but a bit of a disappointment since I had hooters in hand for the celebrations.
That’s exactly the kind of reaction I was hoping for — hooters in hand — when I wrote the headline…I’m glad it didn’t go completely to waste.
Thanks, Jay!
Oh, but for the days of honor, integrity and diligent ombudsmen…
Well done.
Thanks, Will…At The Star I developed a reputation for being error prone but usually recovering well. To the latter talent, I think, I owe my ability to have made a career in journalism…Oh, those errors! They keep you awake at night…
Jimmyc: thanks for clarification. So refreshing to know there is an honest person who admits his mistakes! You are appreciated
I appreciate the comment, Kay…Public screw-ups are always embarrassing, no matter how large or small the audience. And the audience always deserves a clarifitcation or correction…My editors at The Star (as well as at my first paper in northern Kentucky) emphasized the importance of assuming responsibility for mistakes, and I heeded the that tutoring…As Richard Nixon and Bill Clinton demonstrated on a national scale, covering up is not the route to take.
From “A Few Good Journalists”:
You can’t handle the truth? Son, we live in a world that has blogs. And those blogs have to be guarded by men with blogs. Who’s gonna do it? You? You, Lt. Weinberg? I have a greater responsibility than you can possibly fathom. You weep for the Star and you curse the blogs. You have that luxury. You have the luxury of not knowing what I know: that the Star’s death, while tragic, probably saved lives. And my existence, while grotesque and incomprehensible to you, saves lives…You don’t want the truth. Because deep down, in places you don’t talk about at parties, you want me on that blog You need me on that blog.
We use words like honor, code, loyalty…we use these words as the backbone to a life spent defending something. You use ’em as a punchline. I have neither the time nor the inclination to explain myself to a man who rises and sleeps under the blanket of the very freedom I provide, then questions the manner in which I provide it! I’d rather you just said thank you and went on your way. Otherwise, I suggest you pick up a computer and start a blog. Either way, I don’t give a damn what you think you’re entitled to.
Sometimes, Smartman’s comments benefit from broader context. Above, he quoted a man named Robert Alpizar, who, at some point, was an assignment editor at a TV station, maybe down in Florida. Alpizar wrote some ruminations called “A Few Good Journalists.” Here is the material, in full context, that Smartman quoted.
ASSIGNMENT EDITOR: You want answers?
REPORTER: I think I’m entitled.
ASSIGNMENT EDITOR: You want answers?!
REPORTER: I want the truth!
ASSIGNMENT EDITOR: You can’t handle the truth!
Son, we work in markets that have stories. And those stories need to be covered by men with cameras.
Who’s gonna do it? You? You? You’re an anchor wannabe!
I have a greater responsibility than you can possibly fathom.
You lust after the interns and make fun of the competition; you have that luxury. You have the luxury of not knowing what I know: The Lohan story, no matter how stupid, probably got us ratings. And my existence, while grotesque and incomprehensible to you, gets stories. You don’t want the truth, because deep down, in places you don’t talk about at parties, you want me for those stories, you need me for those stories.
We use words like “swing by,” “check out” and “just get me a quick VO (voice over).” We use these words as the backbone of a life trying to cover stuff. You use them as a punch line.
I have neither the time nor the inclination to explain myself to a man who rises and sleeps under the blanket of news I provide, and then questions the manner in which I provide it. I would rather you just said, “Thank you,” and went on your way. Otherwise, I suggest that you pick up a camera and shoot something.
Either way, I don’t give a damn what you think you are entitled to.
REPORTER: Did you order the LIVE SHOT?
ASSIGNMENT EDITOR: I did the job I had to do.
REPORTER: Did you order the LIVE SHOT?!
ASSIGNMENT EDITOR: You’re goddamn right I did!
…Furthermore, I have no idea what the hell the fictional assignment editor is talking about here…To me, it’s just gobbledygook.
Wow Fitz! Talk about serendipity. I was plagiarizing the movie A Few Good Men! Changed a few words and thought A Few Good Journalists made sense. No idea that somebody had out-plagiarized me already.
It’s a small world after all.
I didn’t just happen to know where that came from, Smartman, I had to Google it to run it down.
There you go again…!