Don't ask them to change

Newspapers don’t do innovation well, and by that I mean they just don’t innovate, at all, ever, under any circumstances until they know beyond a shadow of a doubt that it works and then they follow in droves.

Print outlets were late to the internet, late to social networks, late to smartphones and have largely ignored e-readers. Despite the fact that newsrooms overwhelmingly voted for “Change” in 2008 they’re extraordinarily resistance to
embrace change in their professional lives.

From what I can tell newspapers treated the internet largely the same way they treated radio and television, they ignored it and figured it wouldn’t affect their business model, they were wrong. They’ve been willing to accept looses in the hopes that, “One day someone will figure out how to make money off the internet.” Of course Twitter hasn’t really be able to make that much money off the internet.

I think the collective group think is that one day someone will provide a model, prove that it works and then all the newspapers across the world will switch to that format. It’s become sort of a mantra, a religious belief among editors that some day this will happen. The thing is I think the idea has already come and gone, victim to the newsroom’s slab like inability to embrace change.

I firmly believe that somewhere some young, probably recently graduated reporter, pagenator or editor came up with the idea that would save newsrooms. It was probably a simple solution that’s been staring editors and publishers in the face but no one can see it. The rookie probably suggested it up the chain of command where it might have even been considered… before it was cast aside. It would cost money, it would be a risk, it would change how things are done and those are things newsrooms just don’t do.

I don’t want to paint myself as this great innovator, but I’ve experienced how intractable newsrooms are to change first hand. I came to Southern Voice late in its life, but I don’t think I’m speaking out of line when I say there is a common perception among former employees that debt created by Windows Media’s accusation of Genre magazine, among others, was what killed off its viable papers like Southern Voice, The Washington Blade and David Atlanta. How buying money losing outlets would help the company’s bottom line is beyond me, but they wanted a GLBT media empire and were willing to spend to get it.

When I came to the Marietta Daily Journal I came in with an editor who wanted to change the direction of the paper. He quit shortly after I bought my condo, and I was his only hire in the newsroom. Still, I argued for change, change that never happened.

We were assigned this “Hispanic package” that I don’t remember if it ever got to the page. The idea was we were going to take a look at different aspects of the growing Hispanic population in Cobb County. It was a good idea and a valid story package. I suggested we go one step farther.

The paper is independently owned and I suggested to the owner start a Spanish edition. It wouldn’t take that much start up capital. All it would really take is a Spanish speaking/writing reporter, an editor and a pagenator who could translate staff and Associated Press articles into Spanish and become the first
Spanish-language hard news daily in Atlanta.

The costs to that project would have been minimal and the possible rewards of having an outlet that targeted Latino readers could have been immense. It would have been the first, and probably only, publication of its kind where advertisers could reach the growing Spanish speaking publication. I suggest all of this to the owner who I think might have considered it for twenty seconds before saying, “It’s an interesting idea,” and probably never thought of it again.

Yes I realize it’s easy to spend other people’s money, but that was just one in probably a dozen or more ideas I suggested over my year there. Some of those ideas were suggested in meetings specifically to consider ideas for the future of the paper. None of them were ever adopted and from what I can tell they’re still doing what they’ve done since the 1970s.

I’m not the only reporter to float this idea, but Atlanta is the center of Georgia’s political and sporting world. Most papers outside of the metro area won’t send reporters to cover state politics or sporting events, instead they choose to rely on the Associated Press for all their coverage. I’ve floated the idea of customized coverage of the Georgia Legislature to a number of papers, but have gotten no response.

Editors are interested in the concept, a few even said, “We could really use something like that.” They get in the internet age that relying on the AP for their legislative copy means there is nothing unique in their day to day legislative copy and they can’t have reporters cover it from their newsrooms. They get it, but I don’t think they care, or they can’t afford it.

I have a hard time blaming them because they know that content doesn’t get them readers anymore. They don’t know what gets them readers, but they know that good solid news coverage doesn’t do it anymore, so they won’t pay for it. They are more willing to pay an Atlanta based stringer to cover their local football teams when they travel to Atlanta, but there isn’t enough money doing that to make it worthwhile for me.

One of an editor and friend of mine has this idea of doing non-profit journalism, where a foundation would be created to raise money for papers to operate. It's a good idea and it already works for NPR and could be translated to print/web outlets, but no one is willing to try it.

I don’t know what the solution to the internet is, but I bet someone out there did. It may have been sent up the chain of command, it may have even gotten to the decision makers where they thought the concept was good in theory… but would require change, and that is one thing newspapers are unwilling to embrace.