The AP

[Jcindy]

I am truly afraid the Springer demographic is growing faster than those of us who look for the facts of the matter before coming to a conclusion. Just look at what passes for mainstream entertainment.

[Seth]

Originally Posted by The Reaper

The problem with the newspaper management today is that with notable exceptions, they do not self-police unless confronted by massive fraud backed up by public outcry. If the public doesn't say anything about it, it didn't happen.

TR

Even "public outcry" is given but lip service on most editorial boards. It's seen as a "make good" to placate the offended readership.

In today's "profit driven" Newspaper mangement, revenue guides editorial decisions. Circulation is but a small portion of revenue in larger newspapers. Readership only counts as a factor in advertsing billing rates. Thus, not offending the advertiser is paramount. The L.A. Times cares more about the revenue loss from General Motors, than fielding true combat journalists.

The "Watchdogs of public interest" have been overbred into the "Lapdogs of advertising interests".

The rise of the citizen journalist evokes irony in the face of wire news services, like the Associated Press. The AP can't, or won't place an Ernie Pyle type in the AO, but the troops themselves can webcast their perspectives. The rapidity and reach of such communication only hightlights the faults of the profit-driven newsroom. The readership looses confidense, and soon the advertisers will follow.

-Seth

[The Reaper]

I am not sure that the liberal slant is that old, but the spin is.

Anyone remember a guy named William Randolph Hearst?

As you note, advertisers have ruined print media like television has ruined professional sports, and is working on ruining college athletics (football and basketball are lost already).

TR

[jatx]

Originally Posted by The Reaper

As you note, advertisers have ruined print media like television has ruined professional sports, and is working on ruining college athletics (football and basketball are lost already).

TR

Sir,

I assure you that college football in Texas is still as God intended. Feel free to visit anytime!

[The Reaper]

Originally Posted by jatx

Sir,

I assure you that college football in Texas is still as God intended. Feel free to visit anytime!

If you alter your schedules for the coverage, take TV time outs, or watch as athletic programs try to buy the best recruits available with the TV revenues flowing in, TV is influencing your college football. In Texas, I hear that it starts in High School.

TR

[Solid]

Seth,
From what I understand of the newspaper (and also TV media) advertising business, they care about two things:
1) Readership. Readership + Advertisements = Sales, enough said.

2) The newspaper not actively attacking the company or industry directly. By this I mean, taking GM and the LA Times as an example, a front-page story on how GM executives like to have bisexual orgies funded by the lay-off of hundreds of workers. While this certainly effects the news, it does not really apply (in the majority of cases, at least) to the War in Iraq. I can't think of any major companies that are actively against the war in Iraq (and if they are, they're idiots). I suppose the GM could be, as it has raised oil prices somewhat and may in the long-term decrease car sales... but in reality, I'd wager that this effects their business minimally.

Thus, while I completely agree with what you are saying, and what has generally be said around here, I don't think that it pertains directly to the reporting on any of the wars currently being fought by the U.S.

Solid

[The Reaper]

William Randolph Hearst, notable quotes:


"You furnish the pictures and I'll furnish the war."

"News is something somebody doesn't want printed; all else is advertising."

"You can crush a man with journalism.

"Putting out a newspaper without promotion is like winking at a girl in the dark -- well-intentioned, but ineffective."

"If you make a product good enough, even though you live in the depths of the forest, the public will make a path to your door, says the philosopher. But if you want the public in sufficient numbers, you better construct a highway. Advertising is that highway."

"In suggesting gifts: Money is appropriate, and one size fits all."

"The coming of the motion picture was as important as that of the printing press."

“Any man who has the brains to think and the nerve to act for the benefit of the people of the country is considered a radical by those who are content with stagnation and willing to endure disaster."

[Solid]

TR:
I may be wrong, but I thought the only reason Hearst could compete with other newspapers (and undercut them illegally) was because he already had a multibillion dollar inheritance to throw around?

If the above is true, do you think that today's newspapers have the same kind of liquidity to literally create news?

Based on the reaction to certain newspieces recently, both in print and television media, I think the public still doesn't appreciate being lied to, and that journalists seem to like 'outing' each other.

Again, I might be wrong. This is an interesting conversation.

Thank you,

Solid

[The Reaper]

"William Randolph Hearst was born on April 29, 1863, in San Francisco, California, as the only child of George Hearst, a self-made multimillionaire miner and rancher, and Phoebe Apperson Hearst. In 1887, at 23 he became "Proprietor" of the San Francisco Examiner which his father, George Hearst, accepted as payment for a gambling debt..."

I believe that he started out with some millions to his credit, but built the empire and the bulk of his eventual wealth.

Look at the percentage of newspaper ownership by Cox, Gannett and Hearst. As of 2000, ten companies own newspapers that distribute more than 51 percent of the nation’s weekday circulation. By 2003, the percentage of daily circulation belonging to the largest 22 newspaper groups was 69%. Much of their reporting comes from single sources, like the AP wire.

I think the public has no idea how much they are being lied to (or spun), and journalists generally avoid "outing" one another out of professional courtesy.

Just my .02, YMMV.

TR

[Gypsy]

Originally Posted by jasonglh

(from the article posted)

The solution to this problem is seen as making it easier, and safer, for more journalists to get out to where the troops are, without being embedded. Journalists don't like the embed problem, because they get to know the troops they are with too well, begin to identify with them, and have a harder time doing stories criticizing what the troops are doing. So military public affairs officers (PAOs) have asked for more “journalist support” resources. This would involve personal security for individual journalists, transportation (helicopters, armored vehicles, or even a boat), and access to an Internet link so they could upload their video. The brass are reluctant to go this route, because there are far more journalists who would ask for this, than could be accommodated (there is, after all, a war going on.) The journos who get left out will not be happy, and some of those who go will likely run anti-military stories anyway. But the PAO’s believe it should at least be tried on as large a scale as possible.

If a journalist is a true objective professional, then they should have no problem embedding AND printing the truth. I see nothing wrong with getting to know the Troops, they are after all human beings and should be recognized as such. So from an objective, unbiased approach that the journalists seem to pride themselves on, they can report it all. The good...the bad...the ugly...the truth. I'm not sure expending additional funds for their PERSEC is an expense the Military should bear. We all know it's dangerous out there, but if you choose to be a reporter in a war zone then do what you must (ie: embed) to keep yourself as safe as possible.

I think the news outlets should not accept any reports unless they are first hand, and verified as such. But...they won't go that route, especially as long as the sheeple deem these stories as acceptable.

[Seth]

Originally Posted by Solid

Seth,
I don't think that it pertains directly to the reporting on any of the wars currently being fought by the U.S.

Solid

Solid,

Granted, I did not draw out the complete illustration on News Media economics, for which I aplogize. Publishers are scrambling for every dollar, both in revenue and expense draw-downs. Newsrooms are overhead. News staffs are being cut back or out-sourced. Copying-editing, once considered a learned skill has been reduced to copy/paste functions by young, just out of J-school, FNGs. War coverage is affected because an executive editor has no money to field reporters, resulting in an over dependence on single-source wire copy. This "single source" effect amplifies liberal bias.


Additionally, Circulation scandals underscore the revenue pressure of newspapers.

Yes. Publishers care about readership, so much so.. they defaud the adverstisers as true readership. And, they are getting caught. If a paper will lie to it's paying clients, what does that hold for it's integrity and ethics in editorial operations?

The Newspaper industry does not report on these stories much; but her are a few examples:

Tribune Co.
Newsday: inflated weekday and Sunday circulation by nearly 100,000 in 2003; earlier years being reaudited.

Hoy: daily circulation of the New York edition in 2003 about half of what had been reported
Remedy: up to $95-million set aside to compensate advertisers
Stock price since announcement: down 12 percent

Hollinger International

Chicago Sun-Times: single-copy circulation overstated by 72,000 daily copies for several years
Remedy: No compensation program yet announced
Stock price since announcement: down 3.2 percent

Belo Corp.
Dallas Morning News: inflated daily circulation by 1.5 percent, Sunday by 5 percent

Remedy: set aside $23-million for advertisers
Stock price since announcement: down 3.7 percent

McClatchy Comapny.
Minneapolis Star Tribune

Federal Class action lawsuit by a group of adverstiers, claiming inflated circulation numbers, resulting in being over-charged for advertising.



The News "Industry" is in deep trouble, far more than is known or "reported". Like other socalist driven enterprises, it's suffocating in it's own lies.

-Seth