Journalism for results, not recognition

December 23rd, 2009

A tweet from a fellow editor drove me into my latest of fructose-fueled blind rages on a popular topic of mine: Monday morning quarterbacking.

The article centers around two arguments — that the Post got the situation wrong in its coverage of the snowball incident, and that the Post didn’t give the Washington City Paper credit for breaking the story. Without going into the merits of the Post’s coverage, I can say this to the Washington City Paper: Nobody cares what you have to say on the subject, or, at least, they shouldn’t.

I got about a quarter of the way down the page and was partially in agreement until I realized something I hadn’t noticed while skimming. Besides the fact the writer was making an argument better made by a 5-year-old, he was also breaking a sacred covenant — he was writing about himself.

Any story written internally can be guaranteed to be biased, which is why legitimate news organizations generally avoid doing so. Sure, The New York Times has enough layers it can still produce a thorough and accurate report on an internal development, but I’m still going to trust someone else’s reporting more. A small organization, such as the Washington City Paper, has no such layers. The post amounts to nothing more than the paper sounding off on its rival.

After reading a few posts on the Washington City Paper’s Web site (and watching a video re-enactment), I can equate its “reporting” to the type of salacious “journalism” practiced by smaller, inexperienced news orgs or larger, but more universally recognized as shitty, tabloids. If newspapers start taking tips from the Washington City Paper, journalism would be dead in a day.

Sure, I’m getting up on my high horse here — lacing up my “real reporter” britches — but the thought of WaPo taking advice from the likes of the Washington City Paper makes me shiver. Not that there aren’t things to be learned by all of us, but it was the Post’s tireless reporting that brought down a president, not the Washington City Paper’s incessant whining. I can’t tell you how many times I want to complain publicly because The Campus wasn’t given credit for a scoop, but I work not for recognition but for results. The fact that another paper found it important or interesting enough to rip off just validates my work.

So to the Washington City Paper: Shut the hell up and just be glad you scooped a big dog, even if you did so without, you know, actually reporting.

 

Paywalls: It’s all or nothing

November 11th, 2009

In an interesting interview, Rupert Murdoch speaks on the decision to put all News Corp. Web sites behind paywalls.

“Well they shouldn’t have had it free all the time,” Murdoch says, speaking of Internet news readers. “I think we’ve been asleep. It costs us a lot of money to put together good newspapers and good content.”

Pejorative remarks about Murdoch’s holding’s aside, he’s obviously right — it costs a lot of money for good reporting. The Maine Campus is a tiny newspaper in comparison to a national standard bearer like The New York Times or the Wall Street Journal, and we still have a very large budget. It costs unbelieveable amounts to send writers and photographers to dangerous places — the cost of insurance, travel, top-notch equipment and, of course, enough of a paycheck to make it worth their while.

The problem, though, is that there are few newspapers that provide that sort of reporting. The Times and the Journal are the two most notable; The Los Angeles Times and The Washington Post offer some international reporting, but not on the same scale. Most small newspapers — and oftentimes the bigger ones, too — get their international reporting exclusively from wire services, specifically The Associated Press.

In fact, it isn’t even about international reporting. In the age of scrim and save, newspapers that once had national bureaus are cutting them or turning them over to interns. Many local newspapers fill a good 50 percent, minimum, with wire copy. Some papers even use the wire for local coverage. Just to be clear: I don’t mean to excoriate the AP. That post will come at a later date.

The point is, papers that rely heavily on the use of wire content will not be able to survive behind a paywall. You can’t charge readers for content that isn’t 100 percent yours. It’s too easy to search Google for a topic and find a free site to go to with the exact same story.

The only way it will work is if all newspapers band together and agree to construct one giant paywall, which of course isn’t going to happen. Short of that, the only papers for which a paywall is feasible are the truly unique papers: the ones with less than 1 percent of their content from wire sources. The other 999,998 newspapers will have to find some other way to survive.

There will be much, much more to come on this.

P.S. Does anybody else think Murdoch is going to die any second now?

What’s coming down the pike for Courier

November 11th, 2009

I’ve been working some on Courier recently, and am on the verge of a new, fairly major, release. In the new version you will see:

  • The ability to map Courier users to WordPress users
  • Queueing support
  • Statistics on subscriber base changes

The biggest problem I’ve been having so far is getting WP Chron to work. It doesn’t seem to fire, meaning that no e-mails are sent. I’m also worried about ensuring that all e-mails are sent — in the current system, you’re presented with a list of all the e-mails sent and whether they succeeded or failed. With queueing, it’s harder to verify that all the e-mails went out.

I’ll most likely be attending WordCamp this Saturday, and hopefully I’ll have the chance to ask some people smarter than me what I’m doing wrong.

Financial independence: How much is it really worth?

November 6th, 2009

The Maine Campus is, like many other large college newspapers, a separate company from the university. While we are in large part funded through advertising revenue, we still take some money from the university, which we classify as a subscription fee. This is oftentimes lamented, but as we move into a harder time for newspapers in general, we need to ask how much financial independence is really worth.

Some of the best news organizations are not financially independent; the BBC is funded by a fee the British government collects, and NPR receives quite a bit of money from the government. Yet, those two organizations produce some of the best reporting in the world, whereas the USA Today has never even come close to producing such stories. Sure, it may be easier for The New York Times to report objectively on certain subjects, but all news orgs have their kryptonite — subjects they hate to breach.

We will see more non-profit news orgs relying heavily on grants in the future. This may well be the only way papers can survive as consumers increasingly demand free news — it will either be go non-profit or drop investigative reporting altogether. For my money, NPR provides a better service than 75 percent of the for-profit newspapers and certainly broadcast news outlets out there, so I would love to see others follow their lead.

This, of course, isn’t to say that news organizations, and in particular college newspapers, should avoid financial independence. It’s a great thing if you can swing it. But it is by no means a necessity to be an effective and qualitative news source. Generally the barriers are simpler — laziness and inexperience. Most universities are smart enough not to pull funding over an article, and the ones who aren’t that smart are just asking to be sued. The University of Maine has limited oversight over our financial operations and absolutely no oversight over what we print. The only way for them to try and squelch us would be to not write us a check next semester — certainly not the most effective form of censorship.

As a final note, what newspapers should avoid is being funded through student governments. Student governments are generally petulant and petty and do not have the same levels of bureaucracy and protection larger governments do, and so one hard-hitting article makes it likely to get the paper’s funding pulled. The Campus is directly funded through a separate fee called the communications fee, thereby ensuring as little meddling as possible. Also, college newspapers need to be editorially independent — no prior review of articles — and should be separate organizations from the university. If you do have to break off from the university, you don’t want them holding your copyright.

Welcome

October 30th, 2009

Welcome to the Web site of William P. Davis. This site will serve as a way to showcase my work in music, journalism and design. Feel free to browse my work. Rate sheets are included for each section.

My new blog will center on college media and student journalism.

I am the editor in chief of The Maine Campus at the University of Maine and an associate at CoPress. You can e-mail me at will [at] wpdavis.com or call me at 207.660.5342.

Maybe you want to read my résumé or some of my articles.
William P. Davis