They’re late to the party, but several major American newspapers are now putting the pedal to the electronically charged metal.
In recent weeks, at least three papers — The Star, the Wall Street Journal and the Denver Post — have signaled their intentions to accelerate the transition from print to digital and thereby try to reclaim some of the customer loyalty they’ve lost as the Internet left them in the dust.
They’re doing this because they have no choice; it’s change or die. Newspapers have the best news-gathering operations of any media but still have lost much of their former dominance in news dissemination.
…Let me be clear that I am not blaming newspapers for this state of affairs because, like most people in the newspaper industry, I didn’t see the wave coming until well after it had engulfed us.
During the infancy of the Internet, I would have endorsed — and laughed with — Arthur Ochs “Punch” Sulzberger’s dismissive attitude toward the Internet.
In a May 1994 speech he made right here in Kansas City, he said:
“This evening I should like to try out another old-fashioned view. It is my contention that newspapers are here to stay. They are not going the way of the dinosaur – rendered extinct, in this case, by the wonders of a new technology that will speed us down an interactive information superhighway of communications.
“I’ll go one further. I believe that for a long time to come this information superhighway, far from resembling a modern interstate, will more likely approach a roadway in India: chaotic, crowded and swarming with cows. Or, as one might say, udder confusion.”
That was a funny line, but the joke was on Punch and the rest of us old-media sorts who clung to tradition and denied what was unfolding before our eyes.
Finally, though, many newspapers are flying full tilt toward digital — and specifically toward readers using mobile devices.
Here are a few examples:
:: The Kansas City Star is implementing on July 27 a reorganization plan designed to put the digital product on a higher plane than the print edition. In a June 10 memo to the newsroom, editor Mike Fannin wrote: “We all share in the mission of making the transformation to a fully digital newsroom…All of our content will be scheduled on a digital timeline.”
:: The Wall Street Journal recently initiated a paid, digital-style news app called What’s News. The app is named for the news briefs column that has been a fixture on the Journal’s front page. The Journal has also set an ambitious goal of increasing subscriptions — print and digital — from 2.2 million to 3 million by 2017.
:: The New York Times conducted a one-week experiment where it blocked employees inside its Manhattan headquarters from accessing the paper’s homepage on their desktop computers. The point of the experiment, of course, was to highlight the growing importance of mobile.
:: Denver Post editor Greg Moore issued a memo that said: “We need the entire staff more in tune with producing digital content during the work shift. There is no reason that every reporter and photographer can’t contribute daily to our digital effort. The key is time management. And we need to settle on what is a reasonable level of production.” (In other words, like cops on traffic duty, reporters better get ready for quotas.)
**
In addition to its newsroom reorganization, The Star has commissioned a redesign of the print product and digital versions of the paper. I’m not sure when we will see the new layouts, but indications are that The Star will start putting heavier emphasis on fewer stories.
Fannin wrote:
This should be liberating. For years, we’ve focused on generating 18-20 front-page stories every week. It was a good plan, for its time. But even good plans can become formulaic. Going forward, we won’t assign stories to fill holes. We won’t shoot photos to fill holes. We’ll bless assignments based on their journalistic merit — and their ability to drive readership, engagement, credibility and impact.
I wish The Star the best with the new design and the fresh approach to news gathering and story selection. I hope it’s a successful business model and goes over well with readers.
On the other hand, I’ve seen a lot of reorganizations at The Star over the years, and the worst was the last I saw, in 2004, when the newsroom was turned upside down. Of course, it didn’t help that Knight Ridder sold the paper two years later and that two years after that The Star began laying people off…In retrospect, the reorganization was the first domino to fall, and they’ve been toppling ever since.
In addition, Fannin seems to be so preoccupied by digital that he’s no longer thinking in plain English, which is troubling. He ended his memo like this:
“In conclusion, let me add these assurances: This is an iterative plan, we have a great staff, we’ll keep evolving the strategy, and we can do this.”
If I was still an employee, I would feel a lot better about things if I saw that thought phrased like this:
“Let me add these assurances: You are a great staff with the flexibility and skill to pull this off. We’re doing this by trial and error, and we will continue making adjustments until we get satisfactory results.”
But “iterative“? Please, hold the mumbo jumbo.
JimmyCsays: At the juncture of journalism and daily life in KC 
Jim, I think I have mentioned that because of digital media, I am able to subscribe to four newspapers: the St. Louis Post-Dispatch, the Kansas City Star, the New York Times and The Los Angeles Times. Debra and I also contribute to St. Louis Public Media which has a number of seasoned reporters — some young and several Post-Dispatch alumni.
Our first digital subscription was with the Star in 2011. We liked the ap for our I-pad that brought up on the screen an identical look to the print edition. However, increasingly I am finding that by the time the I-pad edition is ready for all the papers, I have read many of the stories as they went up on the web throughout the previous day. I suspect that to continue to be the trend. i suspect I will miss having experienced editors helping to show which stories are more important than others by where they are placed in the paper.Bottom line, I hope my multiple subscriptions will help keep some experienced reporters employed — we lost several this week at the Post.
I saw that Bill McClellan, the P-D’s longtime Metro columnist, has taken a buyout but will continue to write once a week. That’s a significant blow…You’re more up on current developments in Missouri than anyone else I know, Tom. You could step into a discussion on make a significant contribution.
http://blogs.riverfronttimes.com/dailyrft/2015/07/bill_mcclellan_post_dispatch_severance.php
Today I received an email from the Star, updating their Terms of Service:
http://www.kansascity.com/site-services/terms-of-service/#emlnl=tos2015
It’s a broken link, the past 3 hours. Holy crap, they don’t know what they are doing!
And being true to my own personal ethics policy, I can still write about the Star today– because they ain’t dead. YET.
Hearne told me last year the Star has two rules for free online search. Thirty a month from a landline computer, (multiple clicks on one log-in each count as separate searches) but a higher allowance from one’s cell, to reach the younger, hipper mobile crowd. So maybe they are changing that. Not sure about the quota if I use mytablet.
Let me know. I dropped my subscription two years ago. I am much happier. If there is a decent story, friends alert me to search and read it. They even fired Alice Thorson, so I don’t even need it to map out a First Friday foray.
And in a pinch, after the 30 searches per month are used up, if you squint and scroll, in a grey area, up top, you can still read the story in a little two line window, above their perpetual ad campaign pushing 99 cents for the trial offer.
Reading the Star online is certainly not worth $12.99 a month. There is NO coverage of JoCo news. They did a shitty job of covering KCMO city elections–it was up to Tony Botello at tonyskansascity.com to enterprise video interviews with all the candidates. Pathetic. Tony worked his ass off, for free, but he got it done, AND nailed the predicted winners list. The Star did neither.
When the Star dies, and they donate that glass building to the Nelson for a second Crossroads contemporary gallery, I guess I’ll read about it here on your site, Fitz. Or on Tony’s.
At this writing, “404: Page not found” continues to be the message when I click on the supposed link to the terms of service policy change. Wow…
Thanks, Tracy. Tony does a good job and renders a valuable service for Kansas City area residents, even if at the expense of good taste. (The great question is, Would a large number of readers go away if he ditched the titillating photos?)
…I am continually amazed at how much copy he puts out, apparently making little or nothing on his blog.
“Tony does a good job and renders a valuable service for Kansas City area residents, even if at the expense of good taste. (The great question is, Would a large number of readers go away if he ditched the titillating photos?)”
I tend to agree here…
Tony puts out a good product, but the “sexy” photo links sort of take away the seriousness in it for certain people. On the other hand, it kind of reminds me of the old “pirate” radio stations where they just didn’t give a damn about the censors and put out what they wanted, to some degree. In other words, it is no worse than “the Pitch” in that regard. Have you ever read Savage Love?
Tony isn’t really aiming for the crowd that reads the Star or the New York Times. He’s spamming people who wouldn’t normally concern themselves with what he’s writing about.
So is it tacky? Yeah, but he’s just advertising to a different crowd.
I remembered his site somewhat differently so I hopped over for a quick peek: tkc’s still comprised of 90% aggregate links to/of other’s posts related to KC. Which takes little time, hence the large number of his individual posts. And where he does opine on an issue facts and caution are tossed to the wind (to say nothing of grammar)…which is why I refer to him as KC’s Most Sued Blogger.
His single strength is digging up source docs, regardless whether they’re forwarded his way or he delves into public DBs. But the fact that those docs, as well as the re-posted items from other news sources, are all readily available to anyone with an internet connection devalues those efforts. The “leaked” docs and memos disgruntled folks/whistle-blowers send his way are tarnished by his past use of same (see KC’s Most Sued Blogger.)
All the above, as you’ve noted, is compounded by his overt misogyny and a reliance on soft porn.
All in all? If he ditched the pics, he’d fade probably away as a local concern. Though I imagine the comments sections would continue to do a brisk business in bigotry of all stripes.
“…renders a valuable service…” You have to be kidding. It’s titillating at best (the photos AND copy). If it’s so valuable why would you question it’s demise if the pics went away?
Hey, this just in. Breaking news, as they say. On Hearne’s blog i a story by my friend, Jack Poessiger about the Star’s pathetic Phillipino customer dis-service department, a commenter named Artemis shared a great work around strategy for the Star’s “paywall” limit of 30 searches per month.
He suggests using CCleaner (which is free) to clear your cache, and that will get around the paywall, and allow us each to keep reading their stories for free, rather than the two line grey window. Thank you, Artemis.
Sometimes I feel like we blog commenters, and bloggers like you, Jimmy and Tonyskansascity.com are a lost tribe from a Mad Max movie. Thanks all for sharing. Gotta go to CCleaner now.
But “iterative“? Please, hold the mumbo jumbo.
Even the Star’s use of jargon is outdated: ‘iterative’ was dead to the IT world in 2011, along with other foggy notions like ‘disruptive’, ‘pivot’, ‘lean’ and ‘rock star.’
In about 2010, I attended a symposium of editors from around the country at MU. The host was Randy Smith, a friend of mine who had recently become a business journalism professor at MU. These editors were throwing around terms I had never heard, like “iterations” and “cloud.” (They were also on their phones a good part of the time.) The discussion was about new business models for journalism. I came away wondering if those people were all geniuses or if they were just trying to impress each other. Later, I came to understand the “cloud” concept, but “iterations” still eludes me, and I think it’s a term that should be dumped, if it hasn’t already. I wonder now if about half those editors at that symposium aren’t out of the business.
Good ones, Will Notb!!! Pivot. Indeed. The Star isn’t pivoting, it is twirling like an F5 tornado.
Iterations were perfected by Andy Warhol. An art term for screen printing with overlaid amendments. Frosting the cupcake differently, but it’s still one thing, let them eat cake. (Great Warhol exhibit at Crystal Bridges in Bentonville, just opened. And the 21C Museum Hotel on the square would be great for you and Patty to visit. But dig deep, Fitz. Pricy classy. Four foot lyme plastic penguin stands at your table.)
Now the other overused phrase I hear at all the meetings of 1MillionCups and the two Enterprise Centers and the Kauffman Fdn. is: “Let’s unpack this idea…”
We went to Crystal Bridges several months ago and, indeed, stayed at 21C — just off the square…Sam and his company have done wonders for Bentonville, and to their credit city planners haven’t let commercialism take over.
…Ah, thanks for the mental image of “iterations.” Now, I get it. But Fannin still shouldn’t have used it. For newspaper people, it’s “trial and error.”
Will — Regarding your 9 a.m. July 16 comment…I would advise Tony to dump his comments sections. Anonymous comments, which comprise the vast majority of his, are worthless, in my opinion.
A few thoughts in response to the comments here. First, I thought that the paper seemed less biased once i read it online and there was just a listing of articles. That way, importance is assigned by the reader, not the editor.
As for Fannin’s comments, that’s the first time he’s made sense in a long time. When i had my column in the late 90’s I quickly learned that the column I originally sent in pre-edit was the one that appeared online (where everyone I knew was reading the paper) so I could address whatever issue I was writing about more in-depth before I sat down with the copy editor to fit the column on the page. Rich Hood eventually figured out what i was doing and synched pre with post-edit, but I got away with it for a long time.
That’s a long way around the barn to saying that The Star can now, if it wished, address stories far more in depth and far more rigorously than their electronic competitors (one thinks of Camille Paglia’s online commentaries). That, far more than simply having the same old crap submitted digitally, may be the savior for newspapers. As it stands now they are at a major disadvantage owing to the fact that they have to generate revenue from annoying pop-up ads and the TV stations don’t.
The Pitch and Tony’s are the two best sources for stories that don’t kiss the establishment’s ass in Kansas City. Both are must reads. The Star isn’t. Agree, Tony either needs to do full nudes, or ditch the bathing suit beauties. And, I personally find it somewhat comforting in knowing that given full freedom to say whatever the hell they want there are only one, or two overt racists bandying racial epithets about in the comments section, far better than the Stalinist censorship that goes on at The Star wherein The Star’s bathing beauty, Derek Donovan, has long since banished anyone who disagrees with The Star’s weltanshauung.
Tracy, you don’t need any special software. All browsers have some form of private browsing, or incognito window. Simply use that and you should have no problems.
I’d like to share with your readers the story of how newspapers missed out on the digital age. The CJR article was published in 2011 and is long but it remains fascinating to see how so many smart people missed the boat.
http://www.cjr.org/feature/the_newspaper_that_almost_seized_the_future.php
Thank you, Karen! I look forward to reading this.
Karen, I’m still plowing through the article, but as I told you before, I’m delighted that you landed at the JW, my favorite Kansas newspaper.
As I was plowing through the article, one thing hit me that I’ve mentioned here before and that is in spite of the fact that The Star is burdened with parasitic ownership, a white elephant of a printing plant, incompetent management, a surfeit of deadwood in editorial (and concomitant deficit in experienced reporters (see incompetent management)) who alienate at least half of the paper’s potential readership, it remains profitable. It remains profitable.
Why that fact hasn’t sunk in to all of its former employees who read this blog astounds me. Certainly, there are obstacles that have to be overcome, but there are still a lot of newspapers out there who make a reasonable return on investment (not the gluttonous 30% of the glory years, but still respectable profits to all but a few robber barons) to provide guidance to those who still believe in the written word on a product one can hold in their hands and spill coffee on.
Amazing that in all of the progressive minds of the journalistic community that none have come forward to develop the niche that will always exist for a quality journalistic product. The success stories are certainly out there buried under the tons of negativity and doom and gloom. In its own pathetic way, the Star (or a competitor created by its former talent) could be one of them.
To me, it is all about content. If the Star wants to be relevant, print or digital, it has to provide content that exceeds what other providers produce. It doesn’t do that in either mode. The news stories are little more than what you’d get from the TV stations, but they are way more wordy. The editorial pieces are especially bad. I don’t have to read them. I can predict what each editor will write, almost every time. Nothing new, just trotting out their favored themes, with nothing to make me think I’ve just learned something new. It is preaching, not educating. I stopped subscribing several years ago, after I found I spent maybe five minutes each morning “reading” the paper. (I don’t give a fig for the sports section, so there goes half of the paper from the get-go.) If the paper is to survive, it needs some depth, digital (sorry about that) or otherwise. I’m practically horrified to say, I get more depth these days from The Pitch.
I so agree, Bob Kennedy. The Pitch is currently this town’s newspaper. They break stories of huge local import. Their in-depth pieces are well researched. They also have the best arts and theatre coverage, including First Fridays. They are not afraid to call out the sacred cows, including the Nelson Gallery and Henry Bloch. The Star is totally unwilling to do that. Steve Vockrodt has been especially good, but so are Hudnall and Kendall. And, in the past two years, they’ve trimmed the length of their pieces to be a bit more readable. Back in the day, when they used to be over 10,000 words, only their mothers read to the last graph!