Problems at Patch.com

Let's end the argument by saying Patch is a collection of hyperlocal news websites. There is some great stuff on some of the sites and some of it is garbage.

Most visitors likely don't visit any Patch site besides the one in their town. This means brand awareness only goes so far. Unlike McDonald's, where a food poisoning outbreak in California can ruin business in Maine, the reputation of tennis mom writer in Rhode Island isn't going to affect a Patch site in Minnesota. Outside a small group of readers for that Patch side in Rhode Island, how does it affect the brand as a whole?

 

Actually, yes, it was an attack. Or rather a potshot that contributed nothing to the thread. The fact that you don't even realize that shows how comical it is that you are trying to lecture me about self-awareness.

 

Again, you are proving a complete lack of understanding of the business and of what Patch is.

The fact that it is a different level of quality does not mean that Patch is not a part of the same industry as the New York Times. Patch will never reach that level. Not with its current model, which seems to want to include real journalism with that bulletin board -- which is kind of what a lot of local newspapers do.

And the thing is, those local newspaper can be a stepping stone for a career in journalism. So can Patch. You really think a hiring editor cares about the brand if he or she sees somebody getting the job done? Again, you have no idea what you are talking about.

As far as I know, there are no full-time employees who are just writers for Patch. You have site editors who are writing and editing a ton of copy, taking pictures, shooting and editing video and incorporating social media. It's called versatility and it's a good thing, not a bad thing. I wish my first journalism job gave me that kind of experience when I got started.

Or have you not noticed more and more newspaper writers having to work with twitter and write blog entries and even learn to work with video?

If you actually had even the slightest idea what you were talking about, I wouldn't have to explain that to you.

Would I turn down an established newspaper for a job at Patch? Nope. But both are legitimate options for somebody in need of a start.

 

I've worked for Patch and for newspapers.

I did the same thing for Patch that I did at a newspaper: I gathered information. I wrote a story. I posted the story/submitted it to an editor. Patch is undoubtedly journalism.

 

But...but...they employed the Rhode Island mom! That just ruins everything you did!

(I think that's his argument, right?)

 

Journalism is news. News is journalism.

And this is why you have zero credibility on this board: When it comes to actual journalism, you have no idea what the fuck you're talking about.

You're not one of us. You've never been one of us. You're not going to be one of us.

 

Didn't the EIC at SI name Mary Decker as Sportsperson of the Year when he was dating her in the early 1980s? Wouldn't that be much worse than Timmy's mom and paint SI badly?

 

If standards are not upheld at one Patch site, it makes it harder to uphold standards at every Patch site.

It's likely to affect the morale of the employs who are trying to turn out good journalism.

And, for those not as self motivated, it could lead them to decide that it's easier to cover their own kids croquet tournament instead of chasing after the Governor's helicopter.

Why not? As long as they get up four to six posts per day? And, if you get a couple of the neighbor's kids names in the story, all the better.

A brand's identity and reputation matters both internally and externally. If employees know that their brand doesn't stand for quality journalism, then quality journalism in unlikely to be produced.

Standards are set. Standards are met.

 

100 percent wrong.

The Patch editor in Sioux City isn't going to wake up one morning and go, "Our sister site in Bisbee isn't held to the same high standards ours is. I'm going to quit working as hard."

Nobody at a newspaper gives a rip about what happens at their sister papers. They just don't.

And if you took every newspaper chain in the country and rated the quality of their newspapers. each chain would have a best newspaper, a worst newspaper and a bunch in between.

The folks who work at those papers truly don't care what goes on at other papers.

And it's "morale," not moral.

 

Really? That's what you have to add? Well, that really tore apart my argument point by point.

What else is journalism?

Drudge? FOXNews? ESPN? MLB.com? TMZ? The National Enquirer? The Rutgers Office of Media Relations?

There has to be a defining line between what's journalism, and what's not, right?

My opinion is that once you have Timmy's mommy cover little Timmy's hopscotch tournament -- and do nothing to prevent it from happening again, and don't apologize for it -- you are no longer a brand that stands for journalism.

And, snapping a picture of the Governor's helicopter or winning a local award doesn't overcome that.

You say that like it's an insult, or a put down, or like it will hurt my feelings.

I'm aware of this. It's never been my goal.

 

Different papers within the same chain each have their own brand and standards.

Patch has one brand and standard.

And, few newspaper editors receive memos from management telling them to focus on quantity over quality like the Patch editors did.

It's human nature. People will meet the standards that are set for them. Patch's standards are not set high.

And, thanks for the correction. It's one of many reasons I'm not qualified to work in journalism -- even or at Patch.

 

Wrong again.

The last few years at newspapers have been all about slashing budgets to the bone and laying off journalists, wave after wave.

Newspapers editors don't get memos telling them for focus on quality. They get memos telling them to cut 20 more jobs, tighten their news hole and institute furloughs.

Really, you should try www.coffeeforums.com.