This evening at the Trib, editor in chief Janet Coats sat in a rolling chair in the center of the newsroom while everyone gathered around for the latest news on layoffs.
She went over the list of who was layed off and why. Then she reexplained that 10 more layoffs were to come in the following weeks and how the newsroom would start reorganizing around its new business model.
It was a hard plan for some people to accept. The fact Janet made up her own crazy new business model for a newspaper without a prototype or any idea where it would take her was frightening to a lot of people. They didn’t seem to like an emphasis on changing the reporting model to focus on immediacy instead of the beat system. That didn’t stop her.
There would be mistakes, she said. And sometimes those in charge would fuck up. But there is nothing else to do.
“We can see a better future for journalism right across the bridge on the other side, but the bridge is on fire, and if we just stand here, we are going to burn up with it.”
A few hands shot up into the air.
“Does this mean the Tribune isn’t bringing in any profits?” someone asked
“The Tribune hasn’t been bringing in profits for a long time … This isn’t about profit margins anymore … We weren’t even in the black this year.”
“How is this new model going to affect our competition with The St. Petersburg Times?”
That set Janet off on quite a diatribe.
First, she said people needed to stop thinking of the Times as competition. She said she understood that it’s hard to think that way when the paper is right across the Bay, but that it is the truth. Not every story will be covered and it won’t be covered in the same way the SPT will cover it. The Trib simply doesn’t have the resources for the old business model.
“I hope (The St. Petersburg Times) keeps doing more of the same,” she said. “I’d like to see them try and do it with a reduced staff. It will only make us stronger.”
Then she dropped the reality bomb:
“People need to stop looking at TBO.com as an add on to The Tampa Tribune,” she said. “The truth is that The Tampa Tribune is an add on to TBO.”
Wow. Someone said that? And that someone was the editor in chief? But wait… there’s more.
She continued from this point, saying she wasn’t sure, but that this had to be a step in the right direction. If we don’t move, she said, newspapers will continue their “death spiral – because that’s what this is.”
She compared newspapers to the music industry. Having increased access to music has undermined the corporate giants of the music industry. They are not making money, but demand is just as high if not higher than it ever has been.
That’s how the news is, she said. There is a high demand for it, but with abundant access to it, it’s time to rethink how we can carve out a niche. Her idea? Hyperlocal journalism.
A sports reporter in the Tallahassee bureau was layed off for no other reason other than the fact that it didn’t make sense to keep a full-time staff member there. The layoff was purely geographic. It’s better to keep one more reporter in Tampa than a sports reporter in a town about four hours north of Tampa.
Now there will be more of an emphasis on the hyperlocal and giving the community news about itself. If they want national news, they have several national news sources to get it. Instead, the Trib should be used to give the community something they can’t get from the NY Times or WaPo. Give them their news.
Through most of this meeting, I just wanted to shout, “Amen!” and “You go girl!” because Janet understands what’s up. She can see the trend in the industry: Innovate or obliterate. She stressed more than several times that if newspapers don’t change then NEWSPAPERS WILL DIE.
It’s hard, she admitted. Sometimes she feels temptation to get out of this business and join PricewaterhouseCoopers where she can have a decent salary and lifestyle. But then she thinks of the role of a news organization, and she knows she could never do that.
“This is who I am,” Janet said. “If you asked me who I am, I would first respond that I’m a journalist – probably before I even said I’m a mother.”
Janet believes in the news industry. She believes in holding government, media and the public accountable. And she knows there is not another job that makes such a huge difference and weilds such power. News organizations offer society so much, and that is why she cannot take another job – because journalism is her calling, and she knows there is nothing else she could ever imagine herself doing.
“It’s worth fighting for,” Janet said.
Out of all her quoteable moments, those were the words that stuck with me. It was that powerful statement that conveyed the hope, faith and prayers of all journalists worldwide. That maybe this industry can’t be demolished because of its importance and that maybe our love and passion for it could be enough to keep it running.
Well, it’s going to take more than love and passion. That love and passion must move us to find solutions to keep our industry, our jobs and our identities alive and well. Still, it’s going to take passionate people like Janet Coats to figure it out.
People might be angry or frightened by what Janet is saying, but she’s right, and they need to start recognizing that. She is doing this because she cares. That woman is not only carrying the burdens of an entire newsroom on her shoulders, but the burdens of a community entitled to quality news. And I know she’s taking the right steps.
On my way out of the newsroom, I saw Janet hobbling on her crutches (she broke her ankle) on her way to the elevator and talking to someone. I wanted to tell her how much I supported what she did, but I didn’t want to interupt. Plus, I’m just an intern. But if I had the chance, I would have said this:
Janet, you’re my hero, and I think this is worth fighting for too.
One of the things that seems to be lost in the back and forth here is the notion that nothing will save newspapers or the journalists who are working in their structured environment. I’m not suggesting that there won’t be newspapers or that journalists will go away, but rather that the model is already dead and journalists are flocking to other media structures to do their thing.
Somewhere in this comments thread, I read the criticism that there are no ads here and that paid work in the field isn’t going to come from blogging. The idea was that professional journalists don’t work their craft for free and that the blog “craze” can’t support the trade or the tradespeople being pushed out. I think that misses the mark.
I’ve been arguing here that the newspaper and its news model is already dead. People don’t read newspapers anymore. In fact, people don’t watch TV news anymore either. The striking thing is, people don’t go to the net for news in the place of either medium. They just don’t follow the news. What’s changing that for a new generation of people, and a not so new group as well, is the blog collective. The Huffington Post is one such blog collective as is Alternet. These progressive media outlets function in some respects like a traditional news org, but are incorporating vlogs to deal with TV-style coverage and feature interactive comments.
Journalists and specialists of many kinds blog in these places and are paid for doing so. What they provide isn’t hyperlocal, but rather hyperglobal. They deal with every issue on the face of the earth, but do so outside the constraints of the failed, corporate media structure. The success they enjoy is a certain freedom to produce journalism that is edgy, opinionated, and takes a particular point of view. Objectivity is out the window as it should be. The comments sections offer the chance for readers (and now viewers) to provide feedback immediately and digest the news according to its perceived successes and failures. That’s what the audience wants. That’s why they’ve abandoned “one way media.”
The newspaper and television are dead because they are one way communication which don’t reflect the interactive sensibilities of the modern citizen. The practice of objectivity has left most news at the mercy of the pseudo event, press managers who feed the beast. People want to break through the BS, but don’t know how to do it. The answer is partisan journalism. For better or for worse that’s the audience.
“I read the criticism that there are no ads here and that paid work in the field isn’t going to come from blogging. The idea was that professional journalists don’t work their craft for free and that the blog “craze” can’t support the trade or the tradespeople being pushed out.”
Mike:
My comment about being paid was not suggesting that blogging, or any other form of getting information to people, doesn’t or won’t work (or is a “craze” for that matter) — it was meant to convey my strong belief that bread, butter and Maseratis only come your way if you have the cash (or credit, although I don’t personally recommend that) to get those things.
I applaud anyone who wants to get his/her point across in a blog, an editorial, an op-ed, a letter to the editor, a comment, whatever.
I just strongly believe that if that is what you want to do for living, make damn sure someone pays you for it!
And I certainly, as someone who has made most of my living from the global rather than local aspect of this dead trade, applaud your suggestion that things are going “hyperglobal.”
I just hope there will eventually be some criterion by which we will be able to judge the reality of various protrayals — in all forms of media — of “hyperglobal” events and ideas.
I suspect we can both write a moving account of riding into the night on the back of a Honda clinging to the waist of a Khmer Rouge cadre.
I just wonder how anyone is going to know if either one of us actually did it or not?
And yes, my PS skills are equal to the task of faking the photo.
“There will always been (sic) editorial folks — but there is a new skill set required, a technical set that many people just don’t have (and it’s too difficult to learn Calculus and abstract math late in life).”
Brad:
A lot of us learned the Calculus and lots of other math early in life — they taught it in school even in the far distant past of my high school and uni days.
A lot of us have also transitioned from hot lead to cold type and from Underwoods to Dells and MBPs and from Tri-X and a K1000 to D3s and 1DsMkIIIs and multi-gig CF cards.
I, too, was once young, and brash and dedicated and excited and eager, and I remain all of those things, except young.
This is great biz and I don’t care who does it, or how they do it, as long they get bloody paid for it!
Darryl
1) Wendell Barnhouse rocks. He is neither old nor young; he’s just good.
2) Is it really a wise business decision to cover the PTA meeting at Hillsborough Junior High at the expense of the Florida Gators?
3) Can management check back in a year to tell us how the “hyperlocal” stuff compares to FSU, UF, etc., in hit counts?
I am among those who have worked at the Trib – for less than a year before I escaped in the late 80s. I worked on the county desk – as local at it gets. We would have a couple of decent stories and the rest of the 16-20 page section was filled with total crap.
I don’t know how much the Tribune culture has changed, but back then the majority of the newsroom was two groups of people: those who had strong roots in the Tampa area, and those starting out in the business who would work cheap. The natives settled because they didn’t want to move, most everyone else used their time there on their resumes and got out as soon as they could.
Just a few of the things the nice folks at Media General didn’t tell me about before I moved 2,000 miles to work there:
- They made people pay for parking in the company lot.
- You weren’t allowed to take a Tribune out of the building, and if you wanted to see what the St. Pete Times had, you had to buy your own.
- Very competent editor, I think his name was Bill, had been there 27 years, strong Tampa roots. One Friday a manager told him his services were no longer needed, and he should not come to work on Monday.
What I have learned from my 30 years in newspapers is it’s a business, moreso with Media General than most. This editor Coats has no idea how to attract more readers – no one does – she has been told by the higher-ups to make cuts because it costs more for the people with the yachts and the BMWs to fill their tanks these days. It’s not about journalism, it’s about making money. Period.
Jessica, I can’t help wondering if you are a PAID intern, or if the Trib has generously given you the opportunity to work your ass off for free so you can learn the business. That would be a Media General kind of thing.
[...] Check it out here. [...]
“How is this new model going to affect our competition with The St. Petersburg Times?”
That set Janet off on quite a diatribe.
First, she said people needed to stop thinking of the Times as competition.
—
The Trib isn’t competition for the Times. If they were the quality would be better. Maybe that’s what they’re doing wrong with this current business model of theirs. Maybe the Trib needs to refocus their energy on producing a good product. Maybe that would save them.
Wow, what a great posting. The analogy with the film industry is a good one. Let’s also remember, however, that other industries have been taken down as low and as fast by digital and survived – the travel industry for example. Sometimes when they are at their lowest they can often be on the path to recovery.
Its the vicious comments on both sides of this discussion that is causing journalism to go in to a tail spin. These petty attitudes of people who hate to see someone else have an opinion about something that contradicts their own is why newspapers are bogged down in this muck. Many newspapers and those reporters who work for them are afraid to express any opinion at all for fear of ticking someone off.
Read the comment section of any newspaper’s website and for a lot of the discussions, it’s the modern day version of a barroom brawl. Except people can get away with saying stuff they wouldn’t say to another person’s face.
I’m 33, I’ve worked for newspapers for 11 years. I’m certainly not thrilled with what is happening to newspapers. And I’ve passed the years where I was naive about how things worked. I get ticked off a lot about the way things in the office go just like anybody else, but if comments like these are an indication of the way people are interacting with each other, I wouldn’t worry about newspapers, I would worry more about the human race. If we can’t be civil to each other, then there certainly isn’t any need for journalism, because no one is going to want to talk to reporters, except maybe other reporters.
There is one other thing worth noting I think. Whether you agree with Jessica or not, she appears to have posted all or nearly so, of the comments that people have written (Assuming she could block them as you can in most blogs.)
Maybe she is naive, but apparently she is more willing to allow people their opinion, than some of them are willing to allow Jessica to have hers.
And no, I’m not a brown noser or on either side, just pointing out the facts.
[...] post at Stowe Boyd’s blog here. Some of the other inspirational posts included this one and this one (which has gotten a lot of people’s [...]
Why are so many posts about the writer and the fellow bloggers? Does anybody have a clue — nobody new is buying the paper! People under 50 are “too busy.” Advertisers aren’t advertising in it. The old farts who’ve bought the paper for 70 years are DEAD. And for people who think your salary is covered by the 50-cent cover price (or whatever it is in Tampa) — you’re stooopid. While I wouldn’t say, “you go, girl,” at least the editor tried to be open and honest and so did the intern. They don’t tell us anything at my place of employment.
[...] few days ago, I wrote a blog post heard ’round the world about changes at The Tampa Tribune. The reactions I received in the [...]
[...] It’s worth fighting for: On her blog, a Tampa newspaper intern praises her editor’s speech about newsroom change in the wake of layoffs, sparking a huge debate among veteran ink-stained wretches. [...]
Jessica: The personal attacks by veteran journalists on someone just starting out in the business, combined with the ridiculous nitpicking on insignificant spelling errors demonstrates just how shallow your critics are. You should be commended for telling the story and stating your opinion, which is what blogging is all about.
The people who savage you personally should be ashamed of themselves. Their nastiness only makes them look pathetic and mean. These people call themselves journalists? They’re an embarrassment to the profession.
The volume of trackbacks and comments shows that you’ve clearly touched a nerve. That’s bound to bring critics out of the woordwork, but don’t let it get you down. You done good, girl.
Can you tell us who she does consider to be the competition?
[...] in the short run. We can only make the best of it. That’s why I found the reactions to the intern’s post dispiriting. Ideally, we still want good journalism in a new package. But: if you degrade your [...]
[...] over the weekend about the drawing of battle lines between the old and new in journalism over a blog entry by Tampa Tribune intern Jessica DaSilva. The comment count on her post, by the way, is now up to [...]
@Tom – She said we shouldn’t look anywhere else to determine where to set our standards. We have to set the bar for ourselves. To a certain extent, I think she’s right. But as we all know, The St. Petersburg Times is fierce. I’m not sure if we should entirely discredit our battle for the bay area, especially if we’re aiming to be more hyperlocal.
Fabulous discussion set off by good, honest reporting.
Fear would have kept 99 out of 100 journalists from disclosing this.
After 25 years in newspapers, I don’t believe any editor has the answers.
The top-down, Wall Street-driven, monopoly spoiled management has proven itself incapable of charting a sustainable course.
Customer-focused, self-directed work teams set free from the layers of self-serving bureaucracy might provide the knowledgeable, nimble newsrooms we need.
Could we be the ones we’ve been waiting for?
>>You should be commended for telling the story and stating your opinion, which is what blogging is all about.<<
The problem, and I say this respectfully, is that while that may indeed be what blogging is all about, it’s the polar opposite of what reporting is all about. Making statements like, “The fact Janet made up her own crazy new business model for a newspaper without a prototype or any idea where it would take her was frightening to a lot of people” makes for good blogging but not for good journalism. One simply can’t project thoughts onto subjects. Many people here keep coming back to the issue of nitpicking (the spelling, etc.). But it’s that nitpicking that separates a blog from a newspaper.
Again, with respect, I submit that the problem here isn’t your views on the future of the Trib and journalism (or your editor’s views, for that matter), but whether you can be an objective reporter by day and a subjective blogger by night. You’re showing so many cards via your blog that you might need to pick one sooner or later.
Jessica:
I appreciate your enthusiasm for journalism. I, too, remember what it felt like to be caught up in the energy and excitement of newspapers. Nothing like it, and, sadly, there won’t be anything like it again.
Honestly, I’m shocked that you believe that it’s remotely “cool” or acceptable to write about something going on at your job, and then to sign your name to it. Not only will your current bosses – justifiably – be upset with you for revealing internal information, but it suggests to future employers that you are not trustworthy. Have you not read ANY of the news coverage of bloggers who have hurt themselves professionally by being “open” and “honest”? Have you not thought at all about what you’re going to do after your internship? By clarifying things, you’re only digging a deeper hole.
I hope you are smart enough to realize, now, that Janet Coats’ revolutionary little plan for going “hyperlocal” is at least as old as what Gannett started doing 25 years ago, along with turning news into McNews in response to the success of USA Today.
Coats, sadly, is just about as clueless as any of the other managers, at the Trib and elsewhere, who have responded to journalism’s great crisis by … randomly shooting off half-baked ideas that have done nothing to save the beast.
Like other clueless editors and publishers, she somehow believes that excising sections and removing experienced reporters is going to make the paper more viable.
Huh? Giving readers ever-fewer reasons to pick up the paper is a plus? Turning news coverage over to those with zero experience on their beats is going to improve the product? As mentioned, Coats is as clueless, or a little more, than the rest.
OF COURSE you want to emphasize local coverage, but is she really so out of it that she doesn’t comprehend how many folks locally graduated from FSU and UF, or are just lifelong fans of those schools’ teams? That’s a huge base of readers, and removing the local Tallahassee sports reporter from the staff is yet another example (of many) of Coats and her minions being penny wise and pound foolish.
Sorry to pick on you, but you willingly thrust yourself into this controversy. The shallowness of your post, which suggests that you have little understanding of the background of this controversy and the reality of the impact of the vast cuts, offers a living example of the kind of journalism on the horizon.
Imagine what we’re going to get when misguided editors and publishers achieve their dream of filling papers (or online news “products”) with blog-style work by unformed, uninformed staff and “community columnists.” Wait, we don’t have to imagine.
@ADG, aka Darryl “the Dinosaur”
Receiving a paycheck can be a reassuring thing, but all you need do is glance at a newspaper coin-op and you’d understand how precarious is your percerption of your own value. How much does a daily cost? Two quarters? How much did it cost eight years ago? One quarter? How about eighty years ago? One nickel?
The truth is that the newspaper business has been modelled on selling “value-added” paper for decades. It is the only business that comes to mind where retail prices mirror the actual cost of materials. If your professional concerns are about “getting paid,” then look no further than your newstand price. Do you think that you can ask for $2.00 for that same product? If not, then why?
If newspapers offered an intrinsic value, then their retail price should at least have tracked with that of magazines. In fact, newspapers have decreased retail prices in the face of material inflation. In fact-ER, on any given holiday weekend, my local paper is delivered for free, without invitation.
So while you might have been compensated for your work in the first 20 years of your career, for the last 20, it has cost your bosses money to put you in print.
I’d wager that the future of journalism lies in blog posts like these and PROFESSIONALS like Jessica. At least on the net, the material costs vs. retail prices are breaking even.
The funniest part of all this is that this young intern, via her blog, has now become a name in journalism, being linked to by newspaper-oriented blogs all over the place, and at the center of a core discussion (however productive you might think it is or naive you might think she is — personally, I think any naivete she has is clearly working in her favor here). I have no fear whatsoever for her career; she’ll be very successfully working in whatever the communications industry becomes while all her critics are still blaming their bosses for newspapers having gone the way of vaudeville (and how come all those vaudeville impresarios couldn’t come those minstrel shows packing ‘em in, anyway? Just poor management, I guess).
Argue all you want; she’s already shown the power of open communication on the Internet, and it’s why fewer and fewer people are reading newspapers. It’s not about the content anymore, it’s about the technology, and she gets it. I miss the fine audio quality of LPs (hell, even of CDs, vs. compressed iTunes audio), but my missing it isn’t ever going to bring it back. Ms. DaSilva has already encapsulated the future, and the evidence is this very blog and comment thread. She wins.
[...] “Innovate or obliterate”! Tampa Tribune Jump to Comments http://www.jessicadasilva.com/2008/07/02/its-worth-fighting-for/ [...]
Unfortunately, David Klein and others like him have it wrong. We lose. This type of conversation doesn’t equate to real journalism, even though media companies are bamboozled by certain aspects of the Web, and the prospects of hiring cheaper journalists to make it work. We have already seen shifts in the industry toward blog-based reporting. But so far, nobody is making it work. Nobody reads blog posts about city government, etc., on a newspaper website. In each market, newspaper web sites have only a relative handful of blog devotees, while the vast majority of the readers click on the news stories. The public wants good stories. They were actually buying newspapers when we had staffs and when we were telling good stories. Yet, the pool of reporters continues to dwindle. The promise, and the big lie, turned out to be that once we made our newsrooms information centers and put up more videos and the like, it would actually bring circulation back up because the public would be drawn to get more information than what is available in the newspaper. It didn’t happen, and it won’t happen. Meanwhile, Jessica remains one of millions out there throwing opinions on the Web without doing any real work. It’s easy. It’s not real journalism. It’s a few facts thrown together with personal musings (during work time? geesh. Hope she’s not getting paid.) True, she got all those hits and links. But that was what…. one day? A couple, two or three days? Now…. she goes back to being just another blogger, and just an intern, unless she makes more disparaging statements about older and more experienced journalists. I think we see in her recent post that she learned a lesson, and I don’t think we’ll see that again. She now knows that she has to be outrageous to get the kind of attention she needs in order to drive traffic. The Romaneskos of the world won’t link to her otherwise to drive up her hit count. Too bad, because that’s not what telling a news story is all about.
just fyi, janet coats probably makes 250k or more from media general, and her newish husband is director of the tbo website and probably takes home a similar paycheck. so it’s easy for them to ‘fight’ for the company that butters their bread.
most of those in journalism today and yesterday would have been right at home as slaves on the plantation. the degree of naivete is breathtaking.
re: Dreaming’s comment about Coats and her husband: Isn’t that called nepotism?
If Mindy McAdams truly is a professor in journalism at UF, thank the good Lord I went to UF before she got there. If she is one of the folks teaching Ms. Dasilva … well, that explains a lot.
[...] “It’s worth fighting for” – Jessica DaSilva writes about the cuts at the Tampa Tribune This post, and the comments that it has produced, is going to be studied for many years to come. I think it epitomises the junction we find ourselves at in this industry and the issues which divide people. (tags: blogging future journalism newspapers) [...]
[...] story via Jessica DiSilva) Posted in Rethinking Finance [...]
[...] anger, the negativity, the we-can’t attitude hit a flash point on an intern’s post about job cuts and a newsroom reorganization. Yes, grown-up journalists were using an intern as a punching [...]
It’s remarkable how many self-righteous journalism dinosaurs are posting their (generally anonymous) opinions without troubling themselves to do any reporting or analysis. Scanning through these comments, I see these not-so-sage observations:
* Blogs are a proven failure.
* Hyperlocal journalism is a proven failure.
* Video is a proven failure.
* The Internet is a proven failure.
* All our troubles would go away if we’d just quit giving away our precious content, because free content is a proven failure.
Good lord! Which is worse: Youthful naivete, or the willful ignorance of the middle-aged?
I spent 7 years as a journalist, both print and online, before recently switching to marketing. And some of the comments here show exactly why so many journalists are going to find themselves without careers.
It’s not cool for a cynical journalist, young or old, to praise their bosses, praise the internet, embrace blogging, or actually do anything other than mutter in the corner about how the business used to be. Let’s bring back typewriters….
I moved to marketing for exactly that reason. I see 100s of opportunities for people with knowledge, skills and contacts to work for themselves or for businesses who are embracing the fact that the internet as a tool is changing the way news is consumed in a more widespread way than the printing press or TV.
If I was a talented and supported sportswriter laid off, I’d be starting my own blog or website that day, offering the exact content that gained this support. And the same for any other journalist.
I see a great future for the likes of Jessica, and the likes of Pat Thornton commenting above, because they don’t adhere to the belief that journalism means carrying a card, writing for a print publication, and being cynical about anything that could ever lead to any type of change.
I’d be happy to offer either of them a job, as I have done recently to someone who demonstrated a passion and flair for writing and working to involve and engage people in news and content.
I wouldn’t hire any myopic, blinkered obsessive compulsive who really feels that an entire message rests on one typo – and I know most readers wouldn’t give a rats behind about it, because they’d have been caught up in the writing.
Journalist/Blogger/Website Owner/Content Manager/Grand Tsar of wordsmithery…..the titles and names don’t matter. It’s about getting content which is valued and added to by your readers. Not only has Jessica got support and coverage, but she’s got more comments than most newspaper articles get. Any of the whiners could do it, but they’re more concerned with placating their fears with some petty sniping and complaints about the state of the world without actually trying to change it…
It really irritates me that I’m working with some journalists and Editors who realise how exciting and interesting these times are for gathering and distributing great content – stories, pictures, video – and yet there are so many people who can’t see their jobs going the same way as manual type setters or blacksmiths (There will still be some print publications and journalists…probably about 10 in each country!).
If you put that whining effort into starting a blog, joining Facebook, involving yourself in Twitter etc, you’d have plenty of ideas about how to save the business. And you might realise plenty of people are making money out of the internet – just not a lot of traditional publishers who still rely on the old display advertising model.
Well done Jessica…long may you continue….
[...] thoughtful post by Jay Rosen analyzes the raw emotions unleashed in the comments on Jessica DaSilva’s July 2 post about the Tampa Tribune’s “Black [...]
interesting to see how many of your readers — especially the ones who were or are reporters — respond with nasty comments. They show how lame the typical journalist can be.
This conversation isn’t unique to news. People in business are having similar discussions, arguments, etc. The old school business managers vs. the new generation of entrepenuers/techie types who make work “fun”. I tried to buy a lawnmower at sears—-it was on sale and advertised—-it wasn’t in stock. Same thing with a co-worker—-they are ordering it. Why do we need to go to a store, if they can’t give me the product? The tribune may not survive, but there’s no question it can’t keep doing what it has been doing. We news people are finding out what it was like for all those people losing jobs that we used to interview. I don’t like it—-but what can we do? Let’s hope jessica and the other new naive youngsters find a way to keep journalism going.
People sure love to flame anonymously, don’t they?
Thanks for sharing this, Jessica. Newspaper journalism should be a community of support, not one of anger, self-righteousness and mockery. These are tough times, and there are a lot of people out there who are seeing long careers fall away into nothing. Those of us still in the field should be working as hard as we always have. This profession is indeed a calling.
I’m 25. I don’t give a damn if people think I’m naive or idealistic. That’s why I’m in newspapers, after all.
Meanwhile, the people who have poured sweat, blood, and thousands of unpaid hours of overtime into this unforgiving industry… — Carrie
Reporters are stupid for enabling these conditions. For being professional watchdogs, journalists can’t even figure out how to get decent treatment from the people who sign their checks. “Passion for the craft” is no excuse. A slave who enjoys being a slave is still just, guess what, a slave.
I don’t understand why people who disagree with Jessica’s blog entry, are considered dinosaurs who are mean, self-righteous and unwilling to change. Perhaps, they’re people who have heard Coats’ rhetoric before and have been fighting for a lot longer than two weeks to preserve the future of journalism. Do any of us have the right answers? I think the answer to that is obvious. But I don’t think pointing out that Jessica or Janet Coats may be on the wrong track is spiteful, it’s sharing knowledge that one gains by their experience in the trenches. Not always a bad thing. Also, for the record, layed off, is not a typo or a misspelling. I think if she had said liad off, people might not have said anything. I understand that in typing we can mix up letters or miss a letter or type the wrong letter, but using the wrong word is a different story. The fact that some of you see it as a “just a typo” is one of the problems us “old people” worry about.
I admire your writing and enthusiasm. However, you have to understand a few things. One — this isn’t about reporters or editors being afraid to change. It may be easy to think that, but after your 4th or 5th newsroom meeting where the brass tells you not to be afraid of change, you will begin to understand it is all just a bunch of bs every exec in every industry says to those they are laying off and those left to work harder for less money and security. Hyperlocal is just another term for ‘doing more with less.’ Fact is, the paper’s can’t afford their staffs, maybe even a third of their current cut staffs, so they say they will focus on local news, which basically means they will hire interns like you to work for nothing because they can’t afford anything else.
The content doesn’t matter anymore. It could be the best, most unique and on-target content on the planet and it will not bring back the ad revenue that has fled to web sites like autotrader.com, ebay and craigslist. Keep your heart, but be real — the problem in your newsroom isn’t the reporters and editors around you, it is the sales execs and marketers on the other floors.
[...] prescient, as all sorts of metro daily business models are crumbling, both in Philadelphia and elsewhere. So there’s been a surge of interest in the metro newspaper in the journalistic blogosphere, [...]
[...] newspapers are trying to adapt, but it’s an uphill battle, especially when faced with corporate owners like Sam Zell. Some, [...]
[...] another example of how everyone can start a blog but almost no one should (myself included), Jessica DaSilva–an intern at the Tampa Tribune–describes an internal meeting in which nearly a dozen [...]
Michael: “I’m an editor at a medium-sized paper and I’m sending your name around to everyone I know in the business to make sure that you are never hired anywhere.”
Gosh, I’d hate to be left out of that particular note Mr. Powerful-Editor-With-No-Last-Name. It’s Danny Sanchez. D-a-n-n-y S-a-n-c-h-e-z. Orlando Sentinel. Trying to intimidate a young journalist for putting herself out there and sharing her thoughts on the industry is bullying — plain and simple. Shame on you, coward.
And by the way “EMBARRASSED”, Mindy McAdams was my professor at UF, and she’s a good, dedicated instructor who is doing a lot to teach students and practicing professionals how to grasp online journalism.
Ill-conceived threats aside, this has been an insightful discussion.
To all who have posted, here is a post from DaSilva that appears elsewhere on her blog: “People in Miami do not like politics as much as people in Washington, D.C. No, I haven’t consulted a survey, and I don’t have a reference to back it up. I don’t need one. It’s common sense.”
If that doesn’t send a chill down your spine, then you’re already six feet under. With almost all major papers going “hyper local” (aka “cheap”) then maybe DaSilva’s lack of common sense will indeed become a fact. With that attitude, DaSilva will no doubt soon become Coats’ top assistant.
My God, who is going to be the watch dog on government, business, the legal system, etc.? Journalism has been AWOL for the last eight years and failed to do its duty. Too many editors have had DaSilva’s myopic vision and short attention span. One day it’s a story about torturing prisoners, the next day it’s about Britney Spears being photographed with her naughty bits on display.
OK, so it’s old school. But a daily blog that cheerleads whatever The Boss said is as much like journalism as a square is like a circle.
I find it ironic in a bile-inducing way that newsroom executives want reporters who question the “truth,” who are skeptical of what public officials say. But when those newsroom executives explain a “new direction” served with a side of buzz words, they’r amazed when their employees call B.S. If newsroom bosses want sheep, then hire sheep.
To Mindy McAdams: If you can’t recognize brown nosing and butt kissing then I fear for if your students are receiving any “real world” instruction. If “Jessie” (aka the “lovely and talented” Jessical DaSilva) is one of your prized students then I fear for the future.
To Mike Plugh: Two suggestions: Please step away from the thesaurus. And hire someone to edit your posts; you over-write and your posts read like a high school senior’s term paper.
To Jo Urnalismismisdead: You wrote, “Reporters are stupid for enabling these conditions. For being professional watchdogs, journalists can’t even figure out how to get decent treatment from the people who sign their checks. “Passion for the craft” is no excuse. A slave who enjoys being a slave is still just, guess what, a slave.”
You have no idea what you’re talking about. Journalists often have to work odd hours and overtime because THAT’S THE JOB. A jounralist can’t always go home at 5 p.m. If a journalist’s 40 hours expires 1 hour before the longer-than-expected City Council meeting ends, the journalist doesn’t clock out. That’s the point: Those “slaves” who care about getting the story have poured their lives into what used to be a noble profession. They’re frustrated that the business is being left to the bean counters, the overmatched executive editors and the Jessica DaSilvas of the world.
To Danny Sanchez: The Anonymous Editor who threatened to blackmail DaSilva might have erred by not giving his name and perhaps his idea was too mean-spirited, but he has my support. If I was in a position of hiring, I would have DaSilva on my radar but for all the wrong reasons. And the same goes for you, Mr. D-a-n-n-y S-a-n-c-h-e-z. Orlando Sentinel. As Lou Grant once said, “I hate spunk.”
But fear not, DaSilva and Sanchez. The editors who would think twice before hiring you are disappearing faster than a buyout e-mail can circulate. The brain-dead editors who are taking over will love your write first, think later methods. My advice: make sure to have a lawyer on retainer for those libel lawsuits that are inevitable without second- and third-reads by editors.
From Dreaming: “just fyi, janet coats probably makes 250k or more from media general, and her newish husband is director of the tbo website and probably takes home a similar paycheck. so it’s easy for them to ‘fight’ for the company that butters their bread.”
Perhaps DaSilva’s initial blog “It’s Worth Fighting For” would have been met with a little less vitriol had she included some background “facts” such as the exec ed’s salary and marital situation. Oh … yeah, I forgot … it was only a BLOG; IT’S NOT SUPPOSED TO HAVE CONTENT, BACKGROUND OR CONTEXT. Just the blogger’s top-of-the-head thoughts.