'Black Wednesday' in Tampa

First semester, freshman year, Journ-101: Professor strides into lecture hall two minutes late (to allow everyone to get to their seats and anticipate his arrival). Drops a huge textbook -- might have been a dictionary, for all I know, because he just wanted to make a loud boom! -- onto the wooden podium. Surveys the room for a few long seconds, then says: "By the end of September, half of you will either have dropped this class or you will be failing." He later announced that, for any written assignment, each typo would cost you a letter grade downward. A misspelled name = F.

Some thought, what an ass. I thought, man, I've got to live up to this profession. Hope I can be good enough.

We've lowered the standards, the ethics, the BAR to the point that we're trying to chase after the bloggers' audience. We're Robert Fucking DeNiro now making movies where we play Boris Badenov to animated moose and squirrel. We abandon what we do best -- report and write the hell out of stories, relying on experienced pros, to give readers something they can't get elsewhere -- in a desperate, unflattering attempt to replicate what they have found elsewhere on the WWW. We're at the mercy of tone-deaf numbers crunchers and butt-kissing newsroom management who are determined to justify themselves by making decisions, any decisions, and by doing something different, different in any way, than what came before them.

In short, we have dumbed-down ourselves to the point where we don't matter or offer anything better.

The Tampa paper throws the mindless blatherings of an intern out there as if that contributes to the greater discussion. It simply lowers itself to bathrobe-basement-Mom's PC status.

 

Preach on Joe. Couldn't agree more.

The industry has made the same mistake in dealing with the Web as it did with dealing with TV. We're constantly playing to the strengths of other media.

The whole USA Today movement, with shorter stories because "people don't have time to read across a jump," was a self-fulfilling prophecy. We gave shorter, less-compelling stories and then were stunned when people spent less time with the paper.

That model worked for McPaper because of its unique mission ... the rest of us are expected to do more.

Once I started seeing "blogs" in papers, I knew the end was in sight. If there ever was proof that we just don't get it, that was the big flashing neon sign.

 

Our professors were cut from the same cloth. Near-identical scenario on my first day, and he was correct about half being gone. All of our professors gave an F for a misspelled name.

You're damn right it's a big deal, yet there is a crew on here and elsewhere that has a fit when anyone starts talking about using correct words or why it's important. Not caring about minute details because, "Oh, it's on the Internets. The next thing will replace it in an hour, or we can just correct it" has permeated too many corners. It's been allowed to fester by some management types who agree and even encourage it. "Don't worry, we can just fix it."

That's bullshit. Get it right the first time. Do the damn job correctly and get it right the first time.

Our industry already is dumbed down by lowbrow America's affinity for a Paris-Lohan coochfest, hotdog-eating contests and other insipid crap. Catering to that with a careless attitude and avoidable mistakes won't help matters at all.

 

When I was in j-school 10 years ago, a typo cost you 50 points, and my copy editing professor seemed to take delight in hiding mistakes in the stories we're given to edit. I thank that standard and that approach for making me keenly aware of the importance of basic stuff like spelling and getting a name right. It's also why I still repeatedly proofread every online post I make before and after I post it.

 

All the folks in our biz who are any good had someone in their past who got it through their skulls that accuracy is, in fact, vitally important.

Mine was an older gentleman who was the slot man at my first job. I think about him and am grateful for his guidance all the time.

 

Armao... one of the polarizing, unapologetic, electric and truly able people the biz has seen in recent years.

Absolutely zero surprise this putz, this Coats rack who nuked the FSU writer, was involved in Rosemary's dismissal.

 

This new discussion on the dumbing down of our industry and the lowering of standards only makes Scott Carter's dismissal that much more frustrating and head-scratching. Here was a true professional if there ever was one who took pride in his work and was diligent when it came not only to getting his facts right in his stories but was very careful when re-reading before he hit the send button so as to make the desk guys' job easier. And as has been pointed out before, he was the consummate team player and accepted the FSU beat and the notion that he had to move to Tallahassee because it was helping the paper.

Yet here he sits, wondering what he's going to do for a living while young Jessica sips her beer by the pool and calls everyone she has stored in her cell phone to tell them how many page views her blog has gotten.

Sickening!!!

 

Andy,
Your posts in this thread have been right on the mark. (An aside, we know each other. We last spoke in April.)

What is truly sad about her blog was that it was good to see someone with a positive view about the industry, but it got lost in the way she expressed it.

 

Thanks Sam. And your last thought has been the point I have been trying to drive home the most, that if she had a worthy message it was lost in translation.

And I'm trying to jog my memory as far as April goes. Did we chat at the Sports Journalism Summit in St. Pete?

 

Not sure what you mean by that. We get a constant stream of positivity on a daily basis...

Positive views about the industry
By The Management
1. Fewer employees mean reduced labor costs.
2. Declining circulation means lower newsprint costs.
3. Smaller newshole means less reporting needed, thus fewer reporters.
4. Fewer employees mean fewer sick old bastards tapping into the health benefits.
5. New employees are younger, cheaper and way more malleable. They love us!
6. Declining circulation saves gas and time for delivery people.
7. Red ink is cheaper than black ink.
8. No more pesky community foundations to fund.
9. Vacant newsroom space can be converted into lofts.
10. (No need for lists like this to reach round numbers, since we're doing more with less.)

 

And yet, everybody makes mistakes. Everybody. Not all the time, but nobody is perfect.

And I think the loosening of standards may have happened over time because people realized that there was no money in being really good at this (in the big picture). Or, perhaps, that the margins were better if you didn't take your time and just cranked shit out without regard for who wrote the words or how well they were written. Make it up on volume.

God, we're all sounding like grumpy old men here, longing for bygone days. But I hate the fact that there are people out there who don't take this as seriously as we do. I know Murrow died a long time ago, but the TMZ-ization of actual reporting just...I don't know. Saddens me.

I know there are good people still out there, on the front lines and in management. But I fear they're being systematically hunted down because they just get in the way of profit.

 

I don't believe they're being hunted down.

They're just older, many of them, with larger salaries or posts the management sees as expendable. Tampa's situation with the FSU position is a clear example, and the Trib's management handled it in a completely unprofessional manner that added fuel to a bad situation.

That doesn't mean all of the younger generation of journalists is a group of texting writers with reduced or zero qualms about standards. But as was noted, whatever good things Miss LovelyTalented might have hit on in her blog post was lost with some flippant, stinging comments she'll be remembered for in the future.