Showing posts with label news. Show all posts
Showing posts with label news. Show all posts
Friday, July 17, 2009
Now who will tell us the way it is?
One of my earliest memories is of sitting cross-legged on the floor in front of a black-and-white console TV watching Walter Cronkite's coverage of one of the Apollo moon missions. I was too young to understand the complexity of the science in sending men to the moon, but I knew that this was a big deal. There was something about Cronkite's coverage of the event that told even a young boy that this was a big deal.
My parents still have the console TV I watched the broadcast on. It hasn't functioned as a TV or a radio or a record player in decades. Now it's mostly a long, extremely heavy side table along a wall in my parents living room. But, sadly, Walter Cronkite is now gone.
For much of my youth, the three major networks were all the TV we had, but when it came time for the evening news, like many American families, there was only one channel to watch -- Walter Cronkite on CBS.
Cronkite retired before I pursued my education and a career in journalism. As a print journalist, I don't know that I consciously considered Cronkite an influence, but I know he was a huge influence on my early knowledge and understanding of the world. TV news and journalism have changed a lot since Cronkite retired from the daily media stage in 1981.
I learned about Cronkite's death, not from the evening news, but from the Internet, specifically Twitter, and then read the story on the Wall Street Journal website.
I'll be curious to see how the media world covers Cronkite and his passing. We've been bombarded with all the minutia surrounding Michael Jackson's death for more than three weeks now. By all rights, coverage of Cronkite's death should eclipse coverage of Jackson's death based on the role Cronkite played in generation's of lives. But I know it won't. By Monday morning the media world will largely have moved on to other things, including more trivia about Jackson's life and death. It's a different world than it was in Cronkite's heyday.
At my current job, I have been consumed for more than a week with preparing for the launch of a new website. It's an exciting time and an exciting world. I love the conveniences of modern technology and the speed with which information can be shared with the world. But part of me missed the time when the world was as black and white as that old television set and we could tell the most important issues of the day affecting the world by where they ranked in Cronkite's broadcast and how much time the segment commanded.
So long Walter, and thanks for keeping the issues of the day in perspective.
Tuesday, April 28, 2009
Read and watch news with a critical eye
I am proud to be a journalist. I am also pleased, in this difficult journalistic climate, to still be a full-time employed journalist. But sometimes people need to realize that the things that get reported as big news isn't necessarily important news.
This current swine flu static is a good example. What's largely missing from this story is context. People obviously care about this story. It's resonating with the public. But should people care? Probably not, at least not as much as they the media and general public seems to right now.
As of this writing, Mexican health officials say there have been 159 deaths and 2,498 illnesses so far in that country. Mexico has a population of just under 110 million people. That means that 0.0024 percent of the population afflicted, sick or killed by swine flu in Mexico.
My dad told me something once that put some of what I -- and my media brethren -- do into context. My dad is a pilot. One time he had a problem with the landing gear on a plane he was flying. I don't remember all the details, but I think the nose wheel on the plane didn't come down. So he made an emergency landing at the Hillsboro, Ore., airport. To him it was no big deal, other than it caused some minor, but expensive, damage to the plane.
A TV crew showed up at the airport to cover the "story." He didn't see what made that a story at all. No one was injured. As he put it, it was the aviation equivalent of a non-injury traffic accident. A fender-bender really.
TV stations and newspapers don't show up for non-injury fender-bender accidents. They pay no notice really, unless of course it ties up a freeway during rush out. In that case the collision isn't the story, the story is that large numbers of people are stuck in traffic.
Fifty-five people have died this season of the plain-old flu in the United States, according to the Centers for Disease Control and more than 24,000 have gotten sick from one of the non-swine flu strains. The CDC also estimates that each and every year 36,000 people in the U.S. die from some sort of flu related cause.
Where are the screaming front page headlines over that one? Why don't the stock or commodity markets react to that?
Why? Because it's normal. It's ordinary. News isn't always just what's big or what's important. A critical component of news is often just what's new or different. The old journalism saying is that when a dog bites a man, that's not news, but when a man bites a dog, that's news. Why, because it's unusual.
People are getting sick from something called swine flu. That's new and different. Of course people are getting sick and dying from regular ol' flu too. But that's normal, everyday, run-of-the-mill life and death.
It's sort of like reality TV. Just because everyone is talking about it doesn't mean it's important. It's a distraction for a while from the economic recession, high unemployment and layoffs.
So buckle your seatbelt tight. You are at more risk driving your own car than riding in a plane or from swine flu. There's far more important stuff to worry about. The Blazers have to go back to Houston and play the Rockets on their home floor, after all.
This current swine flu static is a good example. What's largely missing from this story is context. People obviously care about this story. It's resonating with the public. But should people care? Probably not, at least not as much as they the media and general public seems to right now.
As of this writing, Mexican health officials say there have been 159 deaths and 2,498 illnesses so far in that country. Mexico has a population of just under 110 million people. That means that 0.0024 percent of the population afflicted, sick or killed by swine flu in Mexico.
My dad told me something once that put some of what I -- and my media brethren -- do into context. My dad is a pilot. One time he had a problem with the landing gear on a plane he was flying. I don't remember all the details, but I think the nose wheel on the plane didn't come down. So he made an emergency landing at the Hillsboro, Ore., airport. To him it was no big deal, other than it caused some minor, but expensive, damage to the plane.
A TV crew showed up at the airport to cover the "story." He didn't see what made that a story at all. No one was injured. As he put it, it was the aviation equivalent of a non-injury traffic accident. A fender-bender really.
TV stations and newspapers don't show up for non-injury fender-bender accidents. They pay no notice really, unless of course it ties up a freeway during rush out. In that case the collision isn't the story, the story is that large numbers of people are stuck in traffic.
Fifty-five people have died this season of the plain-old flu in the United States, according to the Centers for Disease Control and more than 24,000 have gotten sick from one of the non-swine flu strains. The CDC also estimates that each and every year 36,000 people in the U.S. die from some sort of flu related cause.
Where are the screaming front page headlines over that one? Why don't the stock or commodity markets react to that?
Why? Because it's normal. It's ordinary. News isn't always just what's big or what's important. A critical component of news is often just what's new or different. The old journalism saying is that when a dog bites a man, that's not news, but when a man bites a dog, that's news. Why, because it's unusual.
People are getting sick from something called swine flu. That's new and different. Of course people are getting sick and dying from regular ol' flu too. But that's normal, everyday, run-of-the-mill life and death.
It's sort of like reality TV. Just because everyone is talking about it doesn't mean it's important. It's a distraction for a while from the economic recession, high unemployment and layoffs.
So buckle your seatbelt tight. You are at more risk driving your own car than riding in a plane or from swine flu. There's far more important stuff to worry about. The Blazers have to go back to Houston and play the Rockets on their home floor, after all.
Monday, March 16, 2009
Goodbye P-I
Starting Tuesday, Seattle is a one-newspaper town.
When I heard the announcement today that Tuesday's edition of the Seattle Post-Intelligencer out be its last print edition, I though maybe I would write a long, philosophical post about it. But I just don't have it in me. But I just can't. It's all too sad. Layoffs, furloughs, pay cuts, papers folking. It's just all so bleak. Every newspaper journalist I know has been touched by this. Even those left with jobs have seen 401(k) plans shot to hell and they are left to wonder if, or when, their livelihood might evaporate too. Journalists can relate to those who have lost jobs in this economy, because we all know someone who has joined the ranks of the unemployed. And we all know the competition for future job openings, at least in the short term, will be fierce.
We are like the former newspaper employees who set type in hot lead or did paste-up work in composing rooms. Their jobs were lost forever to technology.
Now, news staffers know the feeling too.
The P-I name will live on, at least for a while, in cyberspace. But it will have far fewer people doing the journalism that covers the issues important to Seattle and the Pacific Northwest.
When I heard the announcement today that Tuesday's edition of the Seattle Post-Intelligencer out be its last print edition, I though maybe I would write a long, philosophical post about it. But I just don't have it in me. But I just can't. It's all too sad. Layoffs, furloughs, pay cuts, papers folking. It's just all so bleak. Every newspaper journalist I know has been touched by this. Even those left with jobs have seen 401(k) plans shot to hell and they are left to wonder if, or when, their livelihood might evaporate too. Journalists can relate to those who have lost jobs in this economy, because we all know someone who has joined the ranks of the unemployed. And we all know the competition for future job openings, at least in the short term, will be fierce.
We are like the former newspaper employees who set type in hot lead or did paste-up work in composing rooms. Their jobs were lost forever to technology.
Now, news staffers know the feeling too.
The P-I name will live on, at least for a while, in cyberspace. But it will have far fewer people doing the journalism that covers the issues important to Seattle and the Pacific Northwest.
Saturday, February 28, 2009
A video obituary of the Rocky Mountain News
This takes a while to load and it's long, but it's a moving tribute to the Rocky Mountain News of Denver by the folks there who are now out of work.
It's a scenario likely to play out in newsrooms, newspapers and cities around the country this year.
Final Edition from Matthew Roberts on Vimeo.
It's a scenario likely to play out in newsrooms, newspapers and cities around the country this year.
Final Edition from Matthew Roberts on Vimeo.
Tuesday, February 10, 2009
Bloggers, be careful what you wish for
I don't think I've ever read an article in Salem Monthly before this week, but there was a copy of it sitting in the lunch room at work and the cover story caught my attention.
In typical tabloid style, the teaser on the cover was different than the headline of the article. The headline of the piece, by Kevin Hanson, is "Defining media: A question of credibility." I think the cover teaser posed the question of whether bloggers were journalists (I don't have the print copy to check).
I thought the piece was interesting. I have my own take, of course.
Most bloggers are definitely not journalists. They are more like columnists, or more precisely people who write letters to the editor, but also own their own presses. Bloggers, mostly, spout opinions, like those blowhards on cable news stations that don't actually cover the news, they just bitch about, well, seemingly everything.
And there's nothing wrong with spouting opinions.
Bloggers have a point of view and express it, something journalists in the traditional media try very hard not to do in their coverage of stories. Journalists (with the exception of opinion writers and columnist) spend most of their working time reporting other people's opinions rather than sharing their own (and opinion writers actually share the opinions of either their editor board or their publisher, which may not be their personal opinion). The job of the journalist is to cover an issue as objectively as possible, to give both sides of the issue (or as many sides as are practical given time and space constraints). Journalists attempt to be fair and balanced. Bloggers have no such limitation.
But let's be honest here. Not all journalists, or all media, are created equal. Not all have the same level of skill or training or experience. This is largely a function of staff size. Papers with small staffs often do not have the luxury of having specialists or people who can spend an entire day, let alone several days (or weeks or months) working on one story. In my earlier life, as an editor in charge of local news reporting staff's at a couple of different newspapers where I worked, I used to have a saying. That saying was repeated often to let the reporters I supervised to remind them of what was expected of them.
"Two stories a day keeps the editor at bay."
I even made up an 8-by-10 sign that hung on my desk to remind reporters of the slogan even when I wasn't at my desk or speaking the words.
Given the number of reporters we had and the general amount of space we had for local news, we needed an average of two stories a day. The New York Times may boast that it's pages contain "All the news that's fit to print," but many papers print whatever news fits. Sometimes the stories have to be whittled down to fit the space, and sometimes you have to make sure you have enough stories to fit the space that will be available.
When a reporter writes two stories a day, those stories are not going to be in-depth investigative pieces. You do what you can, talk to who you can reach quickly and you write quickly.
At the bigger (and better) of the papers where I used that mantra, having most of the reporters meeting that "quota" meant that we could afford to have a reporter every week concentrating on an in-depth story, and we could have a reporter or two a day focused on the biggest story, or stories, of the day for our front page or local section cover. A story could fall through and we wouldn't have to scramble. It gave us flexibility.
Bigger news organizations have more flexibility. They can hold a story if it isn't good enough. If it doesn't pass muster. More people get a chance to read a story it before it makes it to print. Check for typos. Ask questions if things aren't clear or don't make sense. There is someone to ask/deman someone make one more phone call, get one more source, check one more fact.
That doesn't mean a one-person blog or website can't employ journalistic principals. Heck, there are still a few newspapers in small communities out there that have newsrooms that size, or are not much larger.
In the Salem Monthly/WillametteLive.com article, it uses as example of a blogger who wanted to cover a closed session by a government body as the crux of defining just who, or what, a journalist is in Oregon. It's ironic, even comical. I won't comment on whether Mark Buntner, aka Torrid Joe, of loadedorygun.net is a journalist. He's the reporter mentioned in the article, if you didn't follow the link. But I do know that government agencies like the Lake Oswego City Council cannot and should not define what a journalist is or a legitimate news media outlet is.
Journalism is not the government, nor is it is licensed or sanctioned by the government. Oregon has some great open meetings and public records laws, which allows representatives of the news media to attend most types of executive sessions, however discussions in those meetings are not supposed to be reported. A media representative is there, ostensibly, to make sure the members of the government body doesn't do something they are not supposed to do in one of those meeting, like take a vote or discuss a topic other than what they said they were going to discuss in closed session. But one thing I learned as a journalist working for more than 10 years in California, where the laws are not so favorable to the media or the public, it is possible to report the news without having access to closed-door sessions. It makes the job harder, but not impossible. I wished I could have taken Oregon's laws to California with me, but I worked with some damn fine journalists in California who kept government bodies accountable to the public quite well, in spite of laws that made it damn hard for journalist to get some information or prove laws were broken (or at least bent) by government agencies behind closed doors.
If Buntner/Torrid Joe, or any other blogger wants to behave like a "mainstream" media member -- want to be considered a journalist (or citizen journalist) -- and have the opportunity to attend executive sessions, I have one simple suggestion.
If you want to be treated like the news media, then act like the news media. Oregon Revised Statute 192.640 says:
If a blogger/website operator regularly attends a government board's meetings and requests notification of all meetings -- and if the government body complies and includes the blogger(s) on their notification list -- it will be a lot harder later for the government body to say you aren't part of the news media. If you work like the media and are treated like the media, you are the media.
I don't know if Buntner/Torrid Joe did that or not. But if a blogger uses his or her forum to let the public know when government meetings will be held so the people can participate in the public debate too, in council chambers where the actual votes are cast, that's what the media do. If the blogger provides some measure of coverage of issues out of those meetings regularly, that is part of the role journalists play. It's not the sexy part, or the glamorous part, and it is rarely a fun part. Go figure, it's a job. It's work.
Like it or not, along with the First Amendment rights many bloggers so wish to enjoy, there would/will also come some news media responsibilities.
Oh, and one more thing. There may be such a thing as a professional journalist (as in someone who gets paid to report the news), but journalism is not a profession, in the classic definition. It doesn't pay well enough for one thing. But more importantly, journalists are not licensed and journalism does not require a doctoral degree. So for those bloggers that aspire to be considered journalists, you can become one. But if you just want to spout off about your passion for your pet or your personal politics or your shitty day, go for it. People may find that stuff more interesting anyway.
Hell, I'd much rather be a professional blogger -- that is unless blogging becomes a profession. I don't want to have to take a test and get a license.
In typical tabloid style, the teaser on the cover was different than the headline of the article. The headline of the piece, by Kevin Hanson, is "Defining media: A question of credibility." I think the cover teaser posed the question of whether bloggers were journalists (I don't have the print copy to check).
I thought the piece was interesting. I have my own take, of course.
Most bloggers are definitely not journalists. They are more like columnists, or more precisely people who write letters to the editor, but also own their own presses. Bloggers, mostly, spout opinions, like those blowhards on cable news stations that don't actually cover the news, they just bitch about, well, seemingly everything.
And there's nothing wrong with spouting opinions.
Bloggers have a point of view and express it, something journalists in the traditional media try very hard not to do in their coverage of stories. Journalists (with the exception of opinion writers and columnist) spend most of their working time reporting other people's opinions rather than sharing their own (and opinion writers actually share the opinions of either their editor board or their publisher, which may not be their personal opinion). The job of the journalist is to cover an issue as objectively as possible, to give both sides of the issue (or as many sides as are practical given time and space constraints). Journalists attempt to be fair and balanced. Bloggers have no such limitation.
But let's be honest here. Not all journalists, or all media, are created equal. Not all have the same level of skill or training or experience. This is largely a function of staff size. Papers with small staffs often do not have the luxury of having specialists or people who can spend an entire day, let alone several days (or weeks or months) working on one story. In my earlier life, as an editor in charge of local news reporting staff's at a couple of different newspapers where I worked, I used to have a saying. That saying was repeated often to let the reporters I supervised to remind them of what was expected of them.
"Two stories a day keeps the editor at bay."
I even made up an 8-by-10 sign that hung on my desk to remind reporters of the slogan even when I wasn't at my desk or speaking the words.
Given the number of reporters we had and the general amount of space we had for local news, we needed an average of two stories a day. The New York Times may boast that it's pages contain "All the news that's fit to print," but many papers print whatever news fits. Sometimes the stories have to be whittled down to fit the space, and sometimes you have to make sure you have enough stories to fit the space that will be available.
When a reporter writes two stories a day, those stories are not going to be in-depth investigative pieces. You do what you can, talk to who you can reach quickly and you write quickly.
At the bigger (and better) of the papers where I used that mantra, having most of the reporters meeting that "quota" meant that we could afford to have a reporter every week concentrating on an in-depth story, and we could have a reporter or two a day focused on the biggest story, or stories, of the day for our front page or local section cover. A story could fall through and we wouldn't have to scramble. It gave us flexibility.
Bigger news organizations have more flexibility. They can hold a story if it isn't good enough. If it doesn't pass muster. More people get a chance to read a story it before it makes it to print. Check for typos. Ask questions if things aren't clear or don't make sense. There is someone to ask/deman someone make one more phone call, get one more source, check one more fact.
That doesn't mean a one-person blog or website can't employ journalistic principals. Heck, there are still a few newspapers in small communities out there that have newsrooms that size, or are not much larger.
In the Salem Monthly/WillametteLive.com article, it uses as example of a blogger who wanted to cover a closed session by a government body as the crux of defining just who, or what, a journalist is in Oregon. It's ironic, even comical. I won't comment on whether Mark Buntner, aka Torrid Joe, of loadedorygun.net is a journalist. He's the reporter mentioned in the article, if you didn't follow the link. But I do know that government agencies like the Lake Oswego City Council cannot and should not define what a journalist is or a legitimate news media outlet is.
Journalism is not the government, nor is it is licensed or sanctioned by the government. Oregon has some great open meetings and public records laws, which allows representatives of the news media to attend most types of executive sessions, however discussions in those meetings are not supposed to be reported. A media representative is there, ostensibly, to make sure the members of the government body doesn't do something they are not supposed to do in one of those meeting, like take a vote or discuss a topic other than what they said they were going to discuss in closed session. But one thing I learned as a journalist working for more than 10 years in California, where the laws are not so favorable to the media or the public, it is possible to report the news without having access to closed-door sessions. It makes the job harder, but not impossible. I wished I could have taken Oregon's laws to California with me, but I worked with some damn fine journalists in California who kept government bodies accountable to the public quite well, in spite of laws that made it damn hard for journalist to get some information or prove laws were broken (or at least bent) by government agencies behind closed doors.
If Buntner/Torrid Joe, or any other blogger wants to behave like a "mainstream" media member -- want to be considered a journalist (or citizen journalist) -- and have the opportunity to attend executive sessions, I have one simple suggestion.
If you want to be treated like the news media, then act like the news media. Oregon Revised Statute 192.640 says:
Public notice required; special notice for executive sessions, special or emergency meetings. The governing body of a public body shall provide for and give public notice, reasonably calculated to give actual notice to interested persons including news media which have requested notice, of the time and place for holding regular meetings.
If a blogger/website operator regularly attends a government board's meetings and requests notification of all meetings -- and if the government body complies and includes the blogger(s) on their notification list -- it will be a lot harder later for the government body to say you aren't part of the news media. If you work like the media and are treated like the media, you are the media.
I don't know if Buntner/Torrid Joe did that or not. But if a blogger uses his or her forum to let the public know when government meetings will be held so the people can participate in the public debate too, in council chambers where the actual votes are cast, that's what the media do. If the blogger provides some measure of coverage of issues out of those meetings regularly, that is part of the role journalists play. It's not the sexy part, or the glamorous part, and it is rarely a fun part. Go figure, it's a job. It's work.
Like it or not, along with the First Amendment rights many bloggers so wish to enjoy, there would/will also come some news media responsibilities.
Oh, and one more thing. There may be such a thing as a professional journalist (as in someone who gets paid to report the news), but journalism is not a profession, in the classic definition. It doesn't pay well enough for one thing. But more importantly, journalists are not licensed and journalism does not require a doctoral degree. So for those bloggers that aspire to be considered journalists, you can become one. But if you just want to spout off about your passion for your pet or your personal politics or your shitty day, go for it. People may find that stuff more interesting anyway.
Hell, I'd much rather be a professional blogger -- that is unless blogging becomes a profession. I don't want to have to take a test and get a license.
Thursday, January 22, 2009
Group tries to put out fire heating calls for Sam Adams to resign
I hate acronyms. It seems there's an acronym for everything. But I heard about a group today that is just begging to be known by an acronym.
The realization came to me while watching the 11 o'clock news on KATU, the ABC affiliate in Portland. They were leading the newscast with the latest story on the scandal surrounding Portland Mayor Sam Adams.
The story prominently featured Hollie Teal, a supporter of Adams, who believes he should stay in office in spite of his admission that he lied about a sexual relationship he had with a young male a few years ago.
Hollie is working to rally support for Adams. She's started a blog, Sam is Still My Mayor, and a group on Facebook that already has 130 members.
In Teal's interview with KATU she gave the group of supporters an unofficial name. "We are the People in Support of Sam," Teal said. Seems an appropriate name to me. People in Support of Sam -- P.I.S.S. -- because Adams has undoubtedly pissed all over his political career.
I'm fascinated by the Adams scandal story, but the things I want to know aren't the things that are making the evening news, the morning papers or the media websites. I want to know the story behind the story. Rumors of Adams' involvement with the other man in this story were apparently circulating years ago, before Adams officially began his run for mayor. But I want to know what pushed it to the forefront now, after Adams was seated as mayor. I want to know what the conversations were like in the Oregonian newsroom, where Adams' partner works as an investigative reporter.
Sure, I'll check in periodically to follow developments in the story. My daughter lives in Portland, so how the city is run, and who runs it, are of obvious interest. But what I'm really interested in is finding links to the story behind the story of how this broke and the intrigue of how journalists and politicians are intermingled here, like the former Portland Mercury reporter who had been trying to track down the sex rumor and ended up on Adams staff.
Media organizations are good at aggressively pursuing a big, breaking news story and political scandal revealed (in this case, finally, as I understand it, by Willamette Week, to home Adams first confessed his lie). But I am particularly interesting in the story behind the story and how the story made its way to publication/broadcast/posting. Now some of those details are coming to light, like Willamette Week's story on why Adams confessed. I also find it fascinating when media report on the actions of other media. It is, surely, one of the benefits of having a competitive media environment with watchdogs keeping and eye on the actions of government, elected leaders and public servants.
So many media outlet are in financial trouble now, along with the economy, and journalists are among those frequently joining the ranks of the unemployed. One has to wonder how many competitive media market, or how competitive those markets will be, after all the economic dust settles.
This story is fascinating on so many levels. Yep, it's a real P.I.S.S.er.
The realization came to me while watching the 11 o'clock news on KATU, the ABC affiliate in Portland. They were leading the newscast with the latest story on the scandal surrounding Portland Mayor Sam Adams.
The story prominently featured Hollie Teal, a supporter of Adams, who believes he should stay in office in spite of his admission that he lied about a sexual relationship he had with a young male a few years ago.
Hollie is working to rally support for Adams. She's started a blog, Sam is Still My Mayor, and a group on Facebook that already has 130 members.
In Teal's interview with KATU she gave the group of supporters an unofficial name. "We are the People in Support of Sam," Teal said. Seems an appropriate name to me. People in Support of Sam -- P.I.S.S. -- because Adams has undoubtedly pissed all over his political career.
I'm fascinated by the Adams scandal story, but the things I want to know aren't the things that are making the evening news, the morning papers or the media websites. I want to know the story behind the story. Rumors of Adams' involvement with the other man in this story were apparently circulating years ago, before Adams officially began his run for mayor. But I want to know what pushed it to the forefront now, after Adams was seated as mayor. I want to know what the conversations were like in the Oregonian newsroom, where Adams' partner works as an investigative reporter.
Sure, I'll check in periodically to follow developments in the story. My daughter lives in Portland, so how the city is run, and who runs it, are of obvious interest. But what I'm really interested in is finding links to the story behind the story of how this broke and the intrigue of how journalists and politicians are intermingled here, like the former Portland Mercury reporter who had been trying to track down the sex rumor and ended up on Adams staff.
Media organizations are good at aggressively pursuing a big, breaking news story and political scandal revealed (in this case, finally, as I understand it, by Willamette Week, to home Adams first confessed his lie). But I am particularly interesting in the story behind the story and how the story made its way to publication/broadcast/posting. Now some of those details are coming to light, like Willamette Week's story on why Adams confessed. I also find it fascinating when media report on the actions of other media. It is, surely, one of the benefits of having a competitive media environment with watchdogs keeping and eye on the actions of government, elected leaders and public servants.
So many media outlet are in financial trouble now, along with the economy, and journalists are among those frequently joining the ranks of the unemployed. One has to wonder how many competitive media market, or how competitive those markets will be, after all the economic dust settles.
This story is fascinating on so many levels. Yep, it's a real P.I.S.S.er.
Thursday, January 15, 2009
They say we only hurt the ones we love
I guess I should be thankful I am not currently working in the mainstream media.
The news has been grim all year, and there is no sign of it ending anytime soon. Like so many industries, people are losing jobs and workplaces are being retooled in order to remain profitable or return to profitability.
Last week, the Seattle Post-Intelligencer was put up for sale with employees being told if it is not sold the paper may convert to online-only publication, or stop publishing altogether. This week my former employer, Gannett, announced that all non-union employees at their publication will be required to take a week off without pay in the first quarter of this year. This after enduring another round of layoffs at papers last quarter
I am so sad for my friends facing the hardships of losing jobs, losing pay. I am also trying to come to grips with realizing that I may never work in a mainstream newspaper newsroom again, due to jobs being lost and newspapers turning to a workforce shorter on experience that will cost less.
I love newspapers. I love the thrill of covering the news and providing information to the masses. I am a news junky. I love to know what's going on in my community, my former communities, my state, my country and to a lesser extent the world.
But I have a confession.
I do not subscribe to a newspaper. Not anymore.
I am a little ashamed to admit that on a public blog, but it's true.
There is no one single reason I don't subscribe. Perhaps not even a big reason. But the reasons add up to the point where it was easy to cancel my subscription to the local paper last year.
First off, I get my news from multiple sources throughout the day. I have a morning news program as I get ready for work. I listen to a news/talk radio station as I am shaving and showering and on my drive to work. I read a wire service at work, monitoring developments not only for the niche publication I work for, but also for other stories that are of interest to me. I also get bombarded with news releases from various government agencies, companies and organizations at work all day long. I visit multiple websites that feature or have news content on them. We also get a variety of general news and industry publications at work.
That's a lot of news. Too much really.
But I like the instantaneous nature of media today. I like watching events live on TV or online if they are important to me, personally or professionally. I like being able to choose from multiple sources of information when news breaks, like you can online.
It's not the same as stumbling across that story in a newspaper or magazine that catches your eye with its headline, or photographs, graphics or illustrations. It's fun to read stories that I surprise myself in finding I was interested in the topic. I like leaving though the pages to see what treasures are there.
But those treasures seemed to be becoming fewer and farther between. Mostly I found myself reading my local paper or the Oregonian and seeing a headline, or a story, and saying to myself, "I already knew about that. That's old news." It was easy to turn the page and I was left feeling empty. Disappointed.
I also try to be a responsible person and recycle my newspaper. But living in an apartment, I don't have curbside recycling. So gathering up the papers to be recycled was a pain. I still have a box of papers here that I need to take to the recycling drop-off site (along with several phone books, which I have no use for whatsoever, except at work, where they serve as a base for my computer monitor to bring it to eye level). Yep, there's still a box of newspapers to recycle, and like I said, I canceled my subscription last year, in June, judging by the papers at the top of the stack.
The subscription price just wasn't worth it. I don't want or need coupons. Canceling made sense to me. One less bill in the mail. One less payment to made.
The fact of the matter is, I don't really miss it. I pick up a paper now and again out of the rack. But both the Oregonian and Statesman Journal charge 75 cents for weekday papers now. Not a huge sum to be sure, but it seems a waste when I pay it and find only "old" news and then have to recycle the paper too.
I want to be a newspaper reader. I want to have the option of working at a newspaper again. But the fact of the matter is that newspaper companies are gutting their newspaper to remain profitable. They know they are losing readers, and advertisers to online, but still must maintain complex, slow production methods necessary to producing a print product (where the money still is for now) and can't fully focus on a web product and making that profitable.
My own industry and publication are certainly not immune to the economic effects or the trends spreading through the mainstream press like cancer. Our day of reckoning may be coming too, and perhaps it will be closer than we may know.
I realize I am one of the people holding a gun to the head of my own industry. Because my reading habits have changed, because I demand more information faster like so many in my generation and most people in the generations behind mind, there are new fewer people covering news in depth and with experience to do so in as objective a manner as is humanly possible (or probable). Oh, sure there are more bloggers sharing their own experiences and expertise in ways the traditional media never did. In many cases its more interesting, more focused and even more in-depth. But it's rarely balanced. Maybe the balance comes from reading so many perspectives, not getting multiple perspectives in one place. I do miss having a place to turn where people have compiled the news and event in one place that are deemed the most important for a community to know. Maybe that's the price we pay for having quick access to the news.
I do love the news. I love newspapers. I'm not sure if my first love abandoned me or I abandoned it. I dream of reconciling, but our differences may be irreconcilable. It's killing me. And killing newspapers too.
The news has been grim all year, and there is no sign of it ending anytime soon. Like so many industries, people are losing jobs and workplaces are being retooled in order to remain profitable or return to profitability.
Last week, the Seattle Post-Intelligencer was put up for sale with employees being told if it is not sold the paper may convert to online-only publication, or stop publishing altogether. This week my former employer, Gannett, announced that all non-union employees at their publication will be required to take a week off without pay in the first quarter of this year. This after enduring another round of layoffs at papers last quarter
I am so sad for my friends facing the hardships of losing jobs, losing pay. I am also trying to come to grips with realizing that I may never work in a mainstream newspaper newsroom again, due to jobs being lost and newspapers turning to a workforce shorter on experience that will cost less.
I love newspapers. I love the thrill of covering the news and providing information to the masses. I am a news junky. I love to know what's going on in my community, my former communities, my state, my country and to a lesser extent the world.
But I have a confession.
I do not subscribe to a newspaper. Not anymore.
I am a little ashamed to admit that on a public blog, but it's true.
There is no one single reason I don't subscribe. Perhaps not even a big reason. But the reasons add up to the point where it was easy to cancel my subscription to the local paper last year.
First off, I get my news from multiple sources throughout the day. I have a morning news program as I get ready for work. I listen to a news/talk radio station as I am shaving and showering and on my drive to work. I read a wire service at work, monitoring developments not only for the niche publication I work for, but also for other stories that are of interest to me. I also get bombarded with news releases from various government agencies, companies and organizations at work all day long. I visit multiple websites that feature or have news content on them. We also get a variety of general news and industry publications at work.
That's a lot of news. Too much really.
But I like the instantaneous nature of media today. I like watching events live on TV or online if they are important to me, personally or professionally. I like being able to choose from multiple sources of information when news breaks, like you can online.
It's not the same as stumbling across that story in a newspaper or magazine that catches your eye with its headline, or photographs, graphics or illustrations. It's fun to read stories that I surprise myself in finding I was interested in the topic. I like leaving though the pages to see what treasures are there.
But those treasures seemed to be becoming fewer and farther between. Mostly I found myself reading my local paper or the Oregonian and seeing a headline, or a story, and saying to myself, "I already knew about that. That's old news." It was easy to turn the page and I was left feeling empty. Disappointed.
I also try to be a responsible person and recycle my newspaper. But living in an apartment, I don't have curbside recycling. So gathering up the papers to be recycled was a pain. I still have a box of papers here that I need to take to the recycling drop-off site (along with several phone books, which I have no use for whatsoever, except at work, where they serve as a base for my computer monitor to bring it to eye level). Yep, there's still a box of newspapers to recycle, and like I said, I canceled my subscription last year, in June, judging by the papers at the top of the stack.
The subscription price just wasn't worth it. I don't want or need coupons. Canceling made sense to me. One less bill in the mail. One less payment to made.
The fact of the matter is, I don't really miss it. I pick up a paper now and again out of the rack. But both the Oregonian and Statesman Journal charge 75 cents for weekday papers now. Not a huge sum to be sure, but it seems a waste when I pay it and find only "old" news and then have to recycle the paper too.
I want to be a newspaper reader. I want to have the option of working at a newspaper again. But the fact of the matter is that newspaper companies are gutting their newspaper to remain profitable. They know they are losing readers, and advertisers to online, but still must maintain complex, slow production methods necessary to producing a print product (where the money still is for now) and can't fully focus on a web product and making that profitable.
My own industry and publication are certainly not immune to the economic effects or the trends spreading through the mainstream press like cancer. Our day of reckoning may be coming too, and perhaps it will be closer than we may know.
I realize I am one of the people holding a gun to the head of my own industry. Because my reading habits have changed, because I demand more information faster like so many in my generation and most people in the generations behind mind, there are new fewer people covering news in depth and with experience to do so in as objective a manner as is humanly possible (or probable). Oh, sure there are more bloggers sharing their own experiences and expertise in ways the traditional media never did. In many cases its more interesting, more focused and even more in-depth. But it's rarely balanced. Maybe the balance comes from reading so many perspectives, not getting multiple perspectives in one place. I do miss having a place to turn where people have compiled the news and event in one place that are deemed the most important for a community to know. Maybe that's the price we pay for having quick access to the news.
I do love the news. I love newspapers. I'm not sure if my first love abandoned me or I abandoned it. I dream of reconciling, but our differences may be irreconcilable. It's killing me. And killing newspapers too.
Wednesday, December 3, 2008
Media professionals lose while their companies win in a bad economy
The more you study the more you know,
The more you know the more you forget.
The more you forget, the less you know,
so why study?
The more I learn about business and Wall Street and investing, the less I seem to understand. I was listening to a radio talk show this evening on which an economist from the University of Oregon said we are not only in a recession, we are in an economic depression.
You see businesses all over laying people off and some business closing. More people are out of work. This week, more than 1,700 people are losing their jobs from one newspaper company -- Gannett. The layoffs are not done there and the final tally is not yet known. But it will get higher.
To a casual observer, it might make sense because fewer people are out there spending money on stuff, including advertising and newspaper subscriptions. And everyone has probably seen headlines on newspapers or websites of how much advertising has been pulled out of newspapers and other traditional media and was being directed to websites, even before the economic collapse became daily front page news. So it would be easy to assume that publicly owned newspaper companies, like Gannett, are losing money. Right?
Well, they aren't. These companies are still making money, and lots of it. They just aren't making as high of profit margins as they used to make. In order to maintain the margins that Wall Street seems to expect in an economy where real estate advertising and classified advertising have dwindled, costs are being slashed. The biggest costs in the newspaper business are newsprint and people. So, you see the physical sizes of pages getting smaller, the number of pages in papers getting fewer and the number of people on the payroll being slashed in order to maintain profits.
In the interest of full disclosure, I used to work for a Gannett paper in California for 5 years. I left to move back to Oregon to accept a job that allows me to be closer to family. Like many former and current Gannett employees and media observers, I've been following the carnage over on the Gannett Blog.
When I left Gannett, the company's stock was valued at about $74 per share and the company paid a dividend of 27 cents per share. The last five dividends issued by the company were 40 cents per share, but the stock price has fallen through the floor, down to $6.32 a share on Nov. 21.
But what's happened this week? The news has been bleak for newspaper professionals, particularly at Gannett, which is leaving some empty positions unfilled permanently, buying out some workers and laying off others, meaning readers will get less of something, or a lot of things. It doesn't seem to bode well for the short-, or long-term quality of information media. But Gannett's stock price, for the time being at least, is rising for now. Up more than $2.50 a share since Nov. 21 to $8.87.
That's not enough to do much for my 401(k) account, or for the escalating numbers of people out of work. I can't imagine it will do much for readers either.
Many are blaming the Internet for causing the demise of the traditional media. It may be the insatiable demand of Wall Street that a company like Gannett maintains double-digit profit margins (well in excess of 20 percent for lots of newspaper properties) even when the wider corporate world seems to get by with 7 percent margins.
You need to read behind the business headlines. Less profit is not losing money.
I feel bad for the people who are losing job. I even feel bad for the people who are in the position of having to dismiss employees. But the more I understand about all this stuff, the less I seem to know. Because I still don't understand why Gannett's stock has fallen so low, or why a company like Google's could get so high ($279.43 per share even after it's dropped).
But after seeing what happened with mortgages and the credit market and banks, I don't feel so bad. Even the people who get paid to understand financial stuff don't seem to know what the hell they are doing.
All I do know is that a lot of friends and former colleagues are wondering if they will have jobs for long, or if they will have any money left in their retirement funds when all the dust settles. They are wondering what they will do if they can't do what they've known and put their passion into their entire adult lives. It would all be comic if it weren't so tragic.
Monday, March 24, 2008
The land of the free giveaway and the home of the stupid
It's one of those stories that makes you either fear for survival of the species, because people are too stupid to live, or make you fear for your own survival because people will take any opportunity to rip you off.
Someone posted a couple of ads on Craigslist in Southern Oregon saying a homeowner had to leave quickly and his belongings were free for the taking. And given the power of Craigslist, word got out and people showed up and started carting stuff off. (See the story from Associated Press here.) Even when the owner got tipped off to the ripoff and returned home to confront some of the people on his property, they hauled his stuff off anyway.
According to a report in the Medford Mail Tribune, he is starting to get some of his stuff back.
Check out some of the comments being posted to the news article too. I get a particular kick out of the ones justifying people who showed up to take stuff because they believed the ad.
Maybe our schools, churches and families have stopped teaching the lesson about being wary about offers that appear to be too good to be true because they probably are.
Oh, sure maybe someone somewhere is giving stuff away, but don't you think if someone intended to do that they would be there, or someone would be to hand out the booty? Someone that could prove they had title to the property or authority to give it away?
I guess we can only hope the people who would outright steal so blatantly or be so willing to believe such nonsense are also the same bright folks who steal copper wires from live electrical transformers. Perhaps that problem will take care of itself over time.
And if not, I'm going to start crafting my Craigslist ad for Willamette Valley oceanfront property for a bargain price. Why drive all the way to Astoria or Newport or Lincoln City when you can see the ocean from your own private deck, close to I-5.
We accept PayPal, direct electronic transfers or cash.
Someone posted a couple of ads on Craigslist in Southern Oregon saying a homeowner had to leave quickly and his belongings were free for the taking. And given the power of Craigslist, word got out and people showed up and started carting stuff off. (See the story from Associated Press here.) Even when the owner got tipped off to the ripoff and returned home to confront some of the people on his property, they hauled his stuff off anyway.
According to a report in the Medford Mail Tribune, he is starting to get some of his stuff back.
Check out some of the comments being posted to the news article too. I get a particular kick out of the ones justifying people who showed up to take stuff because they believed the ad.
Maybe our schools, churches and families have stopped teaching the lesson about being wary about offers that appear to be too good to be true because they probably are.
Oh, sure maybe someone somewhere is giving stuff away, but don't you think if someone intended to do that they would be there, or someone would be to hand out the booty? Someone that could prove they had title to the property or authority to give it away?
I guess we can only hope the people who would outright steal so blatantly or be so willing to believe such nonsense are also the same bright folks who steal copper wires from live electrical transformers. Perhaps that problem will take care of itself over time.
And if not, I'm going to start crafting my Craigslist ad for Willamette Valley oceanfront property for a bargain price. Why drive all the way to Astoria or Newport or Lincoln City when you can see the ocean from your own private deck, close to I-5.
We accept PayPal, direct electronic transfers or cash.
Friday, March 7, 2008
17 Across: Triumph, but just barely
Something is wrong with the universe. I just finished a New York Times puzzle.
Maybe it's one of their easy puzzles, I don't know. But that was pretty weird.
I know a lot of people in my line of work -- newspaper journalists -- that are crossword puzzlers, but I never picked up the habit. One of my exes was something of a fanatic about her morning routine, which included doing (or at least starting) the puzzle out of the morning paper. Sometimes, I would pick up a half-finished puzzle and try filling in a few blanks, but I would usually lose interest in short order. I'd get bored, or frustrated, or be unsure of the spelling of some word and have no confidence of writing my guess in ink, so I'd toss the paper aside and do something -- anything -- else.
I don't know what possessed me to even start working on a puzzle today. But the lifestyle section of a paper from a few days ago was sitting here next to me and I picked it up and dove into the Sudoku puzzle. Those things, I'm mildly addicted to. In fact it's become part of my bedtime routine to do a few puzzles to empty my brain of other thoughts. I have a Sudoko game loaded on my iPod and I can do puzzles on there for hours until I either get tired of the games or get too physically tired that I doze off.
The Sudoku puzzle in the paper wasn't much of a challenge and I whipped through it pretty fast. I still had some time to kill, so I decided to try a few clues on the crossword. I got more clues than I expected and just kept going. Next thing I knew, all the squares were filled in.
I have a bit of a complex about writing out words, particularly longhand. I'm not a confident speller, and grammar isn't my strong suit either. I used to hate being called up in front of the class in school to write anything on the chalkboard. Maybe that's why I didn't pursue writing earlier in my life. I enjoyed writing but didn't aspire to study it or try to make a living with it because of the stigma about spelling. I took some newswriting classes in college because I had to to pursue my interest in newspaper photography as a major. But I figured the longest thing I'd every have to write was a photo caption after college. It turned out, I was wrong.
Thank God for computers and spellcheck programs. Still, I need an editor (as may be obvious from my posts).
That's my core paranoia. What if the other word folks around me will discover I'm an impostor. That I'm not a word person. I started off in journalism as a photographer. There was no conscious plan to become a reporter/editor. Years ago, when I was between jobs, I had an opportunity to work as a reporter on a fill-in basis for a paper that had a vacancy. The voyage to the word-side was supposed to be temporary. As an ambitious (and poorly paid) reporter, I aspired to move up and became an editor.
Now, after nearly 18 years working as a writer and editor, I'm finding that maybe I'm a little bit more of a word person than I've ever really bothered to give myself credit for being. Most people I've worked with in my career have only known me as a word guy. They don't know that my own self image is that I'm a picture taker who's pulling a fast one on everyone.
It's funny to wake up one morning and realize the person in the mirror isn't the person you thought you'd find. Sometimes you expect to find a Sudoku puzzler and discover a crossword puzzler instead.
Maybe it's one of their easy puzzles, I don't know. But that was pretty weird.
I know a lot of people in my line of work -- newspaper journalists -- that are crossword puzzlers, but I never picked up the habit. One of my exes was something of a fanatic about her morning routine, which included doing (or at least starting) the puzzle out of the morning paper. Sometimes, I would pick up a half-finished puzzle and try filling in a few blanks, but I would usually lose interest in short order. I'd get bored, or frustrated, or be unsure of the spelling of some word and have no confidence of writing my guess in ink, so I'd toss the paper aside and do something -- anything -- else.
I don't know what possessed me to even start working on a puzzle today. But the lifestyle section of a paper from a few days ago was sitting here next to me and I picked it up and dove into the Sudoku puzzle. Those things, I'm mildly addicted to. In fact it's become part of my bedtime routine to do a few puzzles to empty my brain of other thoughts. I have a Sudoko game loaded on my iPod and I can do puzzles on there for hours until I either get tired of the games or get too physically tired that I doze off.
The Sudoku puzzle in the paper wasn't much of a challenge and I whipped through it pretty fast. I still had some time to kill, so I decided to try a few clues on the crossword. I got more clues than I expected and just kept going. Next thing I knew, all the squares were filled in.
I have a bit of a complex about writing out words, particularly longhand. I'm not a confident speller, and grammar isn't my strong suit either. I used to hate being called up in front of the class in school to write anything on the chalkboard. Maybe that's why I didn't pursue writing earlier in my life. I enjoyed writing but didn't aspire to study it or try to make a living with it because of the stigma about spelling. I took some newswriting classes in college because I had to to pursue my interest in newspaper photography as a major. But I figured the longest thing I'd every have to write was a photo caption after college. It turned out, I was wrong.
Thank God for computers and spellcheck programs. Still, I need an editor (as may be obvious from my posts).
That's my core paranoia. What if the other word folks around me will discover I'm an impostor. That I'm not a word person. I started off in journalism as a photographer. There was no conscious plan to become a reporter/editor. Years ago, when I was between jobs, I had an opportunity to work as a reporter on a fill-in basis for a paper that had a vacancy. The voyage to the word-side was supposed to be temporary. As an ambitious (and poorly paid) reporter, I aspired to move up and became an editor.
Now, after nearly 18 years working as a writer and editor, I'm finding that maybe I'm a little bit more of a word person than I've ever really bothered to give myself credit for being. Most people I've worked with in my career have only known me as a word guy. They don't know that my own self image is that I'm a picture taker who's pulling a fast one on everyone.
It's funny to wake up one morning and realize the person in the mirror isn't the person you thought you'd find. Sometimes you expect to find a Sudoku puzzler and discover a crossword puzzler instead.
Tuesday, February 26, 2008
Voters strip mayor of gavel for posing in panties
The mayor of the tiny town of Arlington, Ore., got dooced this week by her constituents. See the full story from the East Oregonian.
Some people just have no sense of humor. Come on, just how many mayors would anyone want to see in their underwear on a fire truck?
There are mayors embroiled in even bigger scandals than this one. Like the mayor of Detroit, Mich. And remember Marion Barry?
Well, I guess there are two lessons to learn from now-ousted Mayor Carmen Kontur-Gronquist's scandal.
One lesson related to the Detroit mayoral scandal too and that is that political (sexual or skin) scandal has now ventured into cyberspace and the wireless world.
The other thing of note in this age of voter apathy is that sometimes your vote really does count, as Kontur-Gronquist was recalled by the slimmest of margins, 142-139. And she got her constituents involved, as nearly every single registered voter in the town cast a ballot. How many mayors can boast that sort of turnout or interest?
Some people just have no sense of humor. Come on, just how many mayors would anyone want to see in their underwear on a fire truck?
There are mayors embroiled in even bigger scandals than this one. Like the mayor of Detroit, Mich. And remember Marion Barry?
Well, I guess there are two lessons to learn from now-ousted Mayor Carmen Kontur-Gronquist's scandal.
One lesson related to the Detroit mayoral scandal too and that is that political (sexual or skin) scandal has now ventured into cyberspace and the wireless world.
The other thing of note in this age of voter apathy is that sometimes your vote really does count, as Kontur-Gronquist was recalled by the slimmest of margins, 142-139. And she got her constituents involved, as nearly every single registered voter in the town cast a ballot. How many mayors can boast that sort of turnout or interest?
Friday, January 18, 2008
Arlington mayor's 15 minutes of national fame
The scandal involving the Arlingon, Ore., mayor's myspace photo controversy will spill over onto national TV today. An interview with the mayor, Carmen Kontur-Gronquist, is scheduled to air tonight (Friday, Jan. 18) an ABC's 20/20.
The mayor has refused calls for her resignation. I'm not sure what folks are so upset about. The mayor has put that tiny burg (population 524 in the 2000 Census), on the map. Her predicament has been a hot topic on blogs, like this post on a blog called "A Slip of a Girl," listed as a lingerie blog, or this one on Blogger News Network, or this one on Death by 1000 Papercuts.
A Google blog search for the term "Arlington mayor photos" brings back 1,411 results. That's nearly three times as many posts about the Arlington mayor than live in Arlington.
Arlington shouldn't be trying to recall their mayor. They should be turning her photos into a calendar (with her consent and permission of course) and turning this into an economic development/revenue generating opportunity. If they city doesn't, someone else will find a way to make money off the deal.
Can Playboy's Girls of City Hall edition be far behind? Maybe they are already trying to capitalize on the sex and politics theme, as one of the items the men's magazine is teasing on its Web site right now proclaims: "Sex in America. Our survey shows that politics doesn't matter between the sheets."
The mayor has refused calls for her resignation. I'm not sure what folks are so upset about. The mayor has put that tiny burg (population 524 in the 2000 Census), on the map. Her predicament has been a hot topic on blogs, like this post on a blog called "A Slip of a Girl," listed as a lingerie blog, or this one on Blogger News Network, or this one on Death by 1000 Papercuts.
A Google blog search for the term "Arlington mayor photos" brings back 1,411 results. That's nearly three times as many posts about the Arlington mayor than live in Arlington.
Arlington shouldn't be trying to recall their mayor. They should be turning her photos into a calendar (with her consent and permission of course) and turning this into an economic development/revenue generating opportunity. If they city doesn't, someone else will find a way to make money off the deal.
Can Playboy's Girls of City Hall edition be far behind? Maybe they are already trying to capitalize on the sex and politics theme, as one of the items the men's magazine is teasing on its Web site right now proclaims: "Sex in America. Our survey shows that politics doesn't matter between the sheets."
Tuesday, January 15, 2008
Death takes a road trip
There is a story out on the Associated Press wire about a woman who died while on a cross-country journey with her family. They were traveling in an RV and the woman died while crossing Wyoming. I've only felt like I might die while crossing Wyoming, but she actually went and did it. But the family didn't stop. They continues on their journey to Oregon before reporting the death.
The story reminds me of a story that a newspaper I worked for several years ago reported about a family that drove the patriarch of their family across the country in the back of his car, post mortem. The guy's final wish was to make one last road trip in his car, and he got his wish. Of course he got embalmed before his trip.
I wish I could find the story that was published in the Daily Press back then by then-reporter Don Holland. It was a story that could have been creepy, or morbid, but Don handled it well and it was actually a humorous story. If memory serves, my friend Mike Sweeney (the photojournalist, not the baseball player, whom I don't know) took the photo that accompanied the story, which was also tastefully done and fit the tone of the story.
I wish I had a copy of that story.
By boss back then used to say that every weird story either began or ended in the desert. In that case, he was referring to the Mojave Desert. Well, not every weird story starts or ends in the desert (although even this one started in California). Some weird stories lead right here to the Willamette Valley.
The story reminds me of a story that a newspaper I worked for several years ago reported about a family that drove the patriarch of their family across the country in the back of his car, post mortem. The guy's final wish was to make one last road trip in his car, and he got his wish. Of course he got embalmed before his trip.
I wish I could find the story that was published in the Daily Press back then by then-reporter Don Holland. It was a story that could have been creepy, or morbid, but Don handled it well and it was actually a humorous story. If memory serves, my friend Mike Sweeney (the photojournalist, not the baseball player, whom I don't know) took the photo that accompanied the story, which was also tastefully done and fit the tone of the story.
I wish I had a copy of that story.
By boss back then used to say that every weird story either began or ended in the desert. In that case, he was referring to the Mojave Desert. Well, not every weird story starts or ends in the desert (although even this one started in California). Some weird stories lead right here to the Willamette Valley.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)