Last Updated: July 28, 2000
Printer-friendly version
President’s speech
Building connections to readers on 3 pillars
Credibility, diversity and encouraging readership each
offer newspapers opportunities to connect with parts of their communities
By N. Christian Anderson III
This is adapted from Anderson’s convention speech.
I want to talk with you today about newspapers and editing newspapers
— and to look backward and forward. My only regret is that we’re not doing
this in the month of January. Janus, you know, had two heads, which enabled
him to look forward and backward simultaneously.
I am not certain that we need to look both ways all the time. But we
should pause from time to time to remember what we have learned from the
past.
Today, I want to apply lessons from the past and thoughts about the
future to map out ways that we can better connect ourselves to the communities
we serve and connect the good people of those communities with each other.
First, I want to offer my perspective about the state of newspaper journalism
today. And to say a word or two about my perspective. As you know, I am
a publisher. I suspect that for some of you, that disqualifies me to talk
about journalism. Well, I submit that I haven’t gone brain-dead since I
became a publisher, although some of you might think I was brain-dead as
an editor.
What I have to say is not about blurring the line between selling advertising
and presenting the news. It’s not about pandering to readers. It is about
our role as people of goodwill, who want to do good journalism with a purpose.
Unfortunately, I fear that we are confused. We’re confused about who
we are and what we do. We’re confused about how to define journalism. We
are confused about what kind of journalism best serves our interests.
We are confused because we are forcing ourselves to make some choices
that we don’t want to make. The question we ought to ask ourselves is whether
we really have to make these choices.
Today, I want to challenge us to think clearly about our role as journalists.
I want us to think about doing the right thing — something different from
how many of us define success. I want to ask you to think about our role
in creating, building and nurturing communities — in connecting communities.
I want you to think about our role as stewards in our communities.
During the convention, we will look at three elements of connecting
to communities — credibility, diversity and readership. It is useful for
us to examine each, and also remind ourselves of how they are so intertwined.
Credibility
In 1997, when Sandy Rowe led us from the Journalism Values Institute
to our multiyear work on improving the credibility of our newspapers, she
was prescient. And while that was unfortunate in one respect, in another
it was very fortunate.
The unfortunate part, of course, was the magnitude of the problems we
have encountered in the past two years. They were big, they were contentious
and they were very public.
Adding to those incidents, last year we heard the results of research
that quantified the problem, and it was not pretty. Today we have work
in hand, with reaction from readers, that tells us we can make a difference.
But let’s step back from that work and think for a minute about doing the
right thing.
We don’t need any research to tell us that readers expect us to get
things right. We don’t need to be reminded that readers want a complete,
fair and honest report of what happened at an event or of an issue that
matters to them. We don’t need research to tell us that readers expect
original work from us.
So, this is a simple equation: We don’t connect with readers when they
know we didn’t get it right, whether it is in terms of facts or of emphasis.
We cannot be leaders in our communities when we are not reliable.
We do ourselves and our communities a huge disservice when we can’t
be counted on. I believe our brands are what distinguish us from the other
purveyors of information and ideas in our marketplaces. But if our brands
are tarnished, won’t information customers go elsewhere? And if people
go elsewhere, what have we lost? Something very precious, both financially
and emotionally.
Let’s reflect a bit on the past. We did not suddenly start making mistakes.
Journalists have always made mistakes. Perhaps what is different is the
relationship we have with our readers. We should ask ourselves why people
think of us as arrogant and biased. Do we set ourselves apart from them?
Do we conduct ourselves in interviews? Is it how we answer the phone? Is
it how we talk among ourselves about the crackpots we’ve heard from or
seen?
Like many of you, I’d had some not-so-good experiences in dealing with
reporters and editors. Those experiences are troubling, especially given
that we know how the system works. Think of how much worse it seems to
someone who doesn’t.
And perhaps the solution is simplistic — or at least deceptively simple.
But we must engage in the conversation with our staff and with our readers,
setting our clear expectations and holding ourselves accountable for getting
it right.
And in our relationships with the people who are our sources and our
customers, we ought to think about how we are perceived — and act accordingly.
That’s one way we can better connect with communities. But as Sandy
Rowe reminded us in 1998, and Edward Seaton reminded us in 1999, we must
get it right and admit it when we don’t, or we’re not connected.
Diversity
The same notion applies to the subject of diversity.
Last April, I talked about the challenge of editing newspapers that
reflect the wholeness of the communities we seek to serve. I said I don’t
think we can do that absent professionals on our news staffs who better
reflect the people we seek to serve.
We must make a personal commitment in this regard. Many times I have
reminded those who would hold ASNE accountable for our slow progress in
diversifying our newsrooms that ASNE does not hire the people in newsrooms
— editors do. Still, I know that ASNE has a role in setting a standard
and helping editors get this done. In that regard, ASNE has been the leader
among newspaper organizations in bringing focus to this issue — and doing
something about it. Today we reported on our annual census — the only one
that seeks to quantify newsroom staffs at every newspaper in the country.
We have made some more progress, but there are miles to go.
ASNE, working with many partners in 1999, determined how we might better
measure our progress in this effort. As a result, the ASNE board adopted
a set of benchmarks to do so. Let me remind you of those benchmarks.
-
We want to increase minority employment.
-
We want to increase the number of minorities we hire for internships.
-
We want to increase the number of minority supervisors.
-
We want to reduce the number of newspapers with no journalists of color
on their staffs.
-
And we want to measure newspapers not simply as a group against a national
number but as individual newspapers connecting with individual communities,
and thus to see how their newsrooms reflect the makeup of their communities.
We also sponsored in partnership with APME our first Time-Out for Diversity
and Accuracy, which encouraged news organizations to take time to think
about how they are doing in this regard, and to chart their course for
the future. Another is planned next week.
This week, we’ll announce two new initiatives with our foundation partners.
But no matter what ASNE does, this is about our ability to connect with
the communities we serve. This is about reliable, accurate and honest portrayals
of these communities. And when we take the time to ask readers how we portray
their communities, too often we hear frustration and anger. Their mirror
shows a different picture, and it says we have not connected.
How can we build communities — how can we nurture communities — when
we paint a picture that seems so different from the way our would-be readers
see it?
How do we involve everyone in a discussion about the future of our communities
when they don’t feel invited?
Later this week we’ll hear about the census and the implications of
its results for our coverage. But we do not need official statistics to
know how our communities are changing. If we are connected, we see the
changing faces and changing cultures and know that we must reflect those
changes in everything we do.
That means we must have diverse eyes and diverse voices contributing
to the shaping of our coverage and presentation, and the ideas we express
in our opinions and commentary. In doing so, we are more likely to be a
place where all the people come together.
So let’s do the right thing. Let’s be leaders. Let’s be reliable. Let’s
make ourselves stand for something: Connecting readers with reality.
We can and should reflect the dreams and aspirations of all citizens
of our communities. We can and should make everyone part of the discussions
about our shared future. We can and should be the place where everyone
comes together.
That is vital to our future — to our role in building and nurturing
communities. It is vital to our stewardship role.
Readership
If we are credible, if we are reflective of the communities we serve,
we have a leg up on readership. But I want to provoke you a little more.
At my newspaper, I remind my colleagues that knowing the people of Orange
County better than anyone else is key to our success. We must know what
people are thinking about, worrying about and talking about. We should
know how people spend their time and money. We should know how they come
together to make decisions — outside of some of the institutions we spend
so much currency on. Then reflect all of that in a way that helps people
enrich their lives.
In fact, if we don’t know these things, we can’t hope to be successful
in connecting with our communities. If we do know these things and don’t
do anything with them, shame on us.
But I am not pessimistic about our future, because I know that many
of you here today share this view.
There has been much talk as well as writing about the impending death
of newspapers. Last year, Andy Grove gave us three years in our present
form.
Let me say this: If death is now just a couple of years away, I think
it is going to be like a heart attack — very sudden. I can’t find any symptoms
that suggest a two-year inoperable illness.
Still, over the long haul we must think and act differently. We need
to learn more about how our readers and would-be readers live. We need
to map those learnings so we can better reflect those lives in addition
to our coverage of the institutions of our communities.
Over the past few years I have sought a way to talk about how I think
we can better serve our readers by bringing them more fully into civic
life. You know there is a direct correlation between a person’s sense of
community and her readership of a newspaper. Thus we would do well to help
readers and potential readers feel that they belong to the community.
Unfortunately, I think we spend too much capital on coverage that shows
the extremes of community issues.
Recently, I heard a quote from Will Durant that eloquently describes
what I am thinking:
Civilization is a stream with banks. The stream is sometimes filled
with blood from people killing, stealing, shouting and doing the things
historians usually record; while on the banks, unnoticed, people build
homes, make love, raise children, sing songs, write poetry and even whittle
statues. The story of civilization is the story of what happened on the
banks. Historians are pessimists because they ignore the banks for the
river.
Are we ignoring the banks for the rivers of our communities? I challenge
myself and all of us to be optimists.
We need to know how people are making decisions that we don’t cover.
We need to remember that PTAs are as vital to the functioning of a school
as any principal is, and far more so than any board of education. We need
to know that ministries are providing social services that far exceed those
of government agencies. We need to recognize how much of an effect community
associations have on the residents of those communities — more so by far
than an occasional city council foray.
In addition to the challenge of looking at alternative ways that people
solve problems and deliver services to each other, I wonder if we might
follow some of Durant’s implied advice — to write about how people are
raising children and building homes and whittling statues.
I wonder if we might support innovation among newspapers, rather than
suggest anything new isn’t Real Journalism.
Yes, we have so many challenges to our future. Can we generate enough
money to create great newspapers? Can we move at Internet speed to meet
the delivery needs of customers? Can we regain our stature as truth-tellers
that causes readers to say, “I saw it in the paper, so it must be true?”
Can we be the place where people come together to discuss and debate
the future of our communities? Can we be the town square that almost isn’t
any more?
I think we know that people long to have connections. They want to be
part of something. To have their voices heard. To hear what others have
to say.
In short, they want to validate their lives. They want to count on something
that includes them.
I’ve told some of you about the summer of 1969 when I ran the weekly
newspaper in Heppner, Ore., after the death of its publisher.
You know, there wasn’t much in the Heppner Gazette Times that the people
of Morrow County didn’t already know. But they flocked to the paper every
week to make sure it was true — or wasn’t, in some cases. The newspaper
validated their lives. And they waited in anticipation every week for the
arrival of the paper.
I don’t suppose we can replicate that situation in Orange County or
very many other places in this country today.
Still, we ought to strive to play the role that great newspapers do
— to be the place where people come to be connected to each other and to
the life of their communities.
There is much debate these days about the pressures of profits, about
the invective from investors. And we know, of course, that newspapers are
businesses that require a return on investment.
Still, aren’t newspapers much more than investments of capital? Don’t
we have a role that sets us apart — to be a steward for our communities?
Bringing people together — helping them understand how our communities
work and then giving them enough information that they are moved to participate
— this is the highest order for newspapers. I hope you, like me, will strive
to be optimistic about that calling. It ought to give us meaning and purpose
in all we do.
Anderson, publisher and CEO of The Orange County Register, Santa
Ana, Calif., was 1999-2000 president of ASNE.
