Even Though You Don’t Want My Feedback, Ms. Newspaper Editor…

Jay Rosen, Columbia University Journalism Professor, posted a picture of a print-editorial piece in The Valley Press, a small local newspaper in Connecticut. It was an intriguing read into the minds of many in traditional media.

For the hard of eyesight (it’s small), let me transcribe this fascinating editorial from editor Abigail Albair:

As a reporter I try to keep my opinions to myself, but as an editor who has in recent weeks observed a disturbing trend in journalism, I feel compelled to come out from behind my computer screen and speak out.

Some of our fellow Connecticut newspapers and news websites have developed a tendency toward an over-involvement of the public in their work. You, our readers are of incredible importance to us and we welcome your story suggestions and your thoughts and opinions on our work and the subject matter which we present to you. Just as we respect your suggestions and comments, we hope you equally respect our ability to do our jobs.

There is a local and arguably national trend developing of publications giving readers the chance to roam newsroom floors and offer tips and guidance on not just what we write, but how it is written. As your local newspaper, we will always welcome suggestions from our readers to allow us to grow and transform. If you have a suggestion to offer, we welcome it, though there is a time and place for it.

In most cases, no one committed to a craft is comfortable with an outsider, with none of the training they’ve had, to successfully do their job, sitting over their shoulder critiquing every move. Everyone needs some perspective and guidance at times, but the fact that other organizations are inviting this into their newsroom on a daily basis suggests to me that they have lost all faith in themselves to adequately fulfill their obligations to the public.

In too many cases, readers are being told at the conclusion of each story printed that what you may have just spent three minutes of your life reading could have contained factual inaccuracies because “everyone makes mistakes.” It is our goal for you to never need to submit “corrections” to this publication, and we find it troubling that other publications would call on the editing skills of their readers.

We hope you will choose us as your newspaper and trust our employees to do their job for you, not the other way around. Truth in journalism is a core principle for those of us who have chosen this profession. It is our objective to offer that to you every day.

It will always be a part of our mission to be approachable. We do welcome feedback from readers, as well as suggestions. We do welcome feedback from readers, as well as suggestions. You can be the source of some of our best topics, but there always come a point where we can “take it from here.” Our staff is dedicated to producing quality journalism whenever a story reaches print.

It is upsetting that some news sources are eager to turn to gimmicks rather than solid, old-fashioned reporting and hard work to sell their product. We are eager, as well, to make you part of our product by reporting on the events in your lives. To that end we pledge to stay plugged into happenings of our communities.

We believe in what we do. We hope we have proven to you that you can believe in us too.

-Abigail Albair, Editor

First of all, apologies to the Valley News for the entire reprint. I could not find it in your online archives so please feel free to link me in comments and I will excerpt for Fair Use.

Now to the heart of the matter… I can see that Ms. Albair is clearly an intelligent woman. According to LinkedIn, she is Co-Editor in Chief at a newspaper less than two years after she graduated Wagner College. Her credentials are strong for being so young and inexperienced. And I mean that kindly.

It’s no secret that I don’t have a degree, much less a journalism degree. I’ve made it to the point of my success through hard work, ambition and going after what I want. However, I don’t think of my self as less-competent than others in my industry who have graduated with Engineering degrees from MIT or Carnegie Mellon.

Ms. Albair’s denigrating look at the public is less than becoming. While I respect anyone with a craft and their ability to do it, we do not live in a vacuum and, in fact, attempting to live in one lacks accountability. The Third Estate has every right to critique the Fourth Estate and absolution of that right, not only empowers an irresponsible press, but abdicates our responsibility to give and receive meaningful input.

The timeline for that abdication of responsibility by the public follows a path like this:

  • Newspaper prints inaccurate story
  • Public accepts story without question
  • Fallout from inaccurate public perception ensues

This is never more appalling than when self-proclaimed news agency, Fox News, implants biased stories with no real objectivity, into the minds of a significant portion of American culture. Because the public questions, there is a “check” in place to cause doubt. But so many others take their “reporting” at face value.

But I don’t want to descend into politics.

Input from the public is very important in 2011. Would we know anything about the coup in Tunisia if it wasn’t for “citizen journalists”? Would we have eyes on the ground in New York City when US Airways 1549 crashed in the Hudson River?

No, Ms Albair. We wouldn’t. While the angst you portray is proper in many respects, the problem is not as you describe. The problem is not public input into your precious protectorate. The problem is editorial oversight. There needs to be more editorial oversight to prevent CNN iReporters from inaccurately reporting Steve Jobs having a heart attack and causing Apple stocks to sell off like wild.

Your job, Ms. Albair, is of utmost importance, because you hold the power to appropriately filter information to the general public. We need more of you. Not less of us. You need more of us because, with your budget shortfalls and attrition in the ranks of fine journalists due to the economy and woo of the internet, you need boots on the ground. You need the general public being your eyes and ears and feeding information into your newsroom. Not the other way around.

But I can see how you see more editorial need being a threat to your job. Not everyone can have an Editor-in-Chief title having graduated Wagner College in 2009. Not everyone. Only the elite.

5 Observaciones Sobre el Estado de los Medios Digitales

Esta fue la introducción de un reporte que escribí hace un año, después de asistir a la conferencia Forbes MEET. Me pareció que seguía tan vigente, que decidí compartirlo con mis lectores.

1. Se agotó la escasez: los sistemas de distribución de contenido se han democratizado.

Los medios tradicionales, como únicos distribuidores de contenido, manejaban una economía de escasez. Funcionaban como un alcabala, decidiendo que distribuir (publicar) y que no. La Internet acabó con este sistema, dándole a todos un canal de distribución eficaz. Los cuellos de botella han desaparecido. Cualquier persona puede publicar su opinión en un blog, un video en YouTube, o hasta distribuir las canciones de su grupo musical. Los MediaSnackers son un ejemplo de usuarios adaptándose a esta nueva forma de generar y consumir contenidos multiples.

2. Time-Shifting: El futuro del consumo de contenido es cuando quieras, como quieras, donde quieras.

Aunque la televisión tradicional continuará siendo relevante y necesaria, cada vez más usuarios optarán por controlar cuándo, cómo y dónde disfrutarán ese contenido. Seguirá existiendo la necesidad de televisión en vivo, debido al aspecto social de poder comentar un programa al día siguiente (el efecto bebedero o water cooler effect). A medida que nos sentimos más cómodos compartiendo con nuestros amigos online (via Twitter, por ejemplo), parte de esta necesidad de compartir va migrando a la Internet.

3. Hacen falta más y mejores editores.

En un mundo con contenido ilimitado y de fácil acceso, se hace cada vez más importante la existencia de editores, recomendaciones, entes de confianza que nos lleven al contenido que valga la pena. A medida que valoramos más nuestro tiempo, se hace más importante y valioso tener editores de confianza. Esto aplica para todo tipo de contenidos (noticias, programas, música, juegos, videos). Sistemas como Digg, aún con sus fallas actuales, pueden ser una solución.

4. Noticias locales: Las noticias estarán cada vez más cerca.

Cuando agencias como Reuters distribuyen su cobertura internacional a todos los noticieros del mundo, el valor de estas noticias cae. Los noticieros y periódicos deben aprovechar su presencia local para dar cobertura a los eventos de real interés para su consumidor… la tendencia es a ir a un nivel hyperlocal, al barrio, a la urbanización, al municipio. La Internet es la via ideal para transmitir este contenido localizado. De igual manera, los usuarios han comenzado a hacer Periodismo Ciudadano, utilizando blogs, videos, podcasts y cualquier otra tecnología de distribución de contenido imaginable para dar su opinión, plantear sus denuncias y comentar los últimos acontecimientos.

5. La Internet competirá con la televisión en el televisor.

En los próximos dos años la Internet estará conectada al resto de nuestro hogar, principalmente al televisor. El contenido existente en Internet competirá con los programas de televisión. Ver un video de YouTube, CurrentTV o Google Video en la pantalla plana de nuestra sala será tan sencillo como apretar un botón en el control remoto. Los medios tradicionales deben hacer un esfuerzo por distribuir su contenido vía Internet (ver Hulu), crear contenido en Internet que apoye su programación tradicional (ver Heroes), y comenzar a competir contra sí mismos en este nuevo espacio.

¿Cómo será el futuro de los medios digitales?

Una versión en inglés de este artículo está disponible en mi blog, RED66.com. An English-language version of this post is available on my blog, RED66.com.