As the Globe reels, papers must drop elitism
Newspapers can survive by reclaiming their roots and remembering their readers.
The Boston Globe moved a step closer to the brink last night when its editorial union rejected what amounts to a 10 percent wage cut, leading management to follow up on its threat and slash pay even more.
Conventional wisdom holds that newspapers have been crippled by the flight of advertising to the Web. But they've been crippled just as much by corporate profiteering, arrogance, elitism, and encroaching dullness that have driven away readers, sometimes in droves.
Newspapers must look back to have a future. They need to reclaim their populist roots – roots that the Web increasingly controls.
Consider what newspapers long did best: Even when faced with the immediacy of radio and then TV, good newspapers offered their communities serendipity and surprise, originality, readable-to-good writing, a sense of purpose and shared experience.
The best papers set the agenda in their news and opinion, offering not the tepid voice of the referee seen in the recent Obama-Cheney torture "debate," but a strong voice of moral leadership. It was the courage of a few Southern newspaper editors, for example, that helped end segregation. They took a stand. They didn't, in the name of "balance," give integrationists and segregationists an equal voice.
Newspapers can reclaim this legacy and their leadership by acting more and reacting less. Three steps come to mind:
1. Stop giving readers yesterday's headlines today.
A week before its staff voted, the Globe featured a single story above the fold that "informed" readers that "President Obama said yesterday the government's majority stake in General Motors Corp. will help create a leaner, more competitive automaker, hours after the company filed for bankruptcy...." It was leftovers, not news.
2. Develop more enterprise that measures the impact of government policies on people and community.
Let the wire services cover politicians' speeches and announcements. Newspapers should use their staffs to measure who is affected and how. I'm not talking year-long, Pulitzer-sized projects here. Instead, newspapers should be investing in strong, daily, manageably sized enterprise that leads to change.