Last Updated: May 20, 1999
Printer-friendly version
An American Editor
Len Downie broadens local coverage, and in this political
town, he doesn’t vote
Leonard Downie became executive editor of The Washington Post in
1991, after serving as managing editor for seven years. He has worked on
the Post for more than 30 years. His titles there have included reporter,
assistant managing editor for metropolitan news, deputy metropolitan editor,
London correspondent, and national editor.
By Jonathan Wolman
Q. You were a terrific reporter. When did you know you wanted to
be an editor instead?
A. I was first forced to become an editor against my will by then-metro
editor Harry Rosenfeld in 1970 because he and his bosses thought I had
become too unproductive as an investigative reporter. I quickly found that
I loved editing, telling people what to do and having a much larger influence
on each day’s newspaper. Then came the Watergate story, on which I became
increasingly involved as an editor as the story built momentum, and five
very rewarding years as AME/metro. I didn’t finally choose the editing
(and managing) fork in the road for good until after my tour as London
correspondent; I did the very best I could with a lot of great stories
(the dawn of Thatcherism, the hunger strike in Northern Ireland, the Rhodesian
peace talks, the Falkland War and the Charles-Diana wedding, among others)
and discovered an outer limit to my writing ability that I never felt as
an editor and manager.
Q. Looking back a few years, what was your biggest challenge when
you moved up from managing editor to the top spot?
A. Evolving the mission of the newspaper and the culture of the newsroom
without disturbing the great foundation that Ben Bradlee had built — and
coping with the fact that, in every way, I just wasn’t Ben.
Q. The Post broke the Monica Lewinsky story. At what point in the
editorial process did the story come to you?
A. On the afternoon in January when Sue Schmidt told us what she had;
we held it out of the first edition while we tried for more confirmation.
We got it, on the record, from Monica’s lawyer.
Q. You were the Post correspondent in London, where sex scandals
have always been the stuff of Fleet Street tabloids. When you first heard
of Clinton-Lewinsky, did you foresee the salacious stories that would eventually
run in The Washington Post? What’s your comfort level when assessing the
presentation of cigar anecdotes and phone sex?
A. I never knew, and still don’t, what to expect on this story, which
has been full of surprises and taste-boundary tests. We are trying to edit
the paper for what parents would allow their teens to read — although we
had to label both the Starr report and Clinton’s grand jury testimony with
warnings because they violated that policy. We told readers that they were
published in separate sections of the paper so that they could be separated
out if desired.
Q. The Clinton-Lewinsky story may be setting a modern-day record
for source material. Are you concerned that news organizations are offering
anonymity too easily? Do you feel your reporters try hard enough to get
their information on the record?
A. I know how hard our reporters are trying to get information on the
record because I talk to them about their sourcing all the time. I also
know how hard they dig and triangulate to assemble information that often
is mistakenly assumed to be spoon-fed leaks.
Q. What are the lessons learned from coverage of the Clinton-Lewinsky
story?
A. Be very careful about everything you publish and when in doubt about
something, hold back. That’s saved us from embarrassing mistakes so far.
Q. What newspapers do you read regularly? Do you keep a TV on in
your office during the workday? Do you watch TV newscasts? Surf the Web?
A. I read The New York Times and The Wall Street Journal, check regularly
on The Sun in Baltimore, Los Angeles Times, USA Today and The Washington
Times. I often check CNBC for Wall Street developments and CNN during breaking
stories. Sometimes I manage to catch part of a network newscast. I peruse
washingtonpost.com regularly and occasionally look elsewhere on the Web.
Q. How often on a typical night do you talk to people at the paper
after you leave for the night? What is your workday, by the way? When you
go to the movies, do you wear a pager? When is the last time you went to
a State dinner?
A. I start work anywhere from 8 a.m. to 10 a.m. depending on breakfast
meetings. I finish about 8 p.m. on normal nights. I stay later a couple
times a week and get called at home a few nights each week. I always wear
a pager and often call in with a cell phone. My only dinner at the White
House was one of the Clintons’ “dinners for 40” at the beginning of the
administration in 1993. I have been to the White House many times for presidential
interviews dating back to LBJ.
Q. Is it true you don’t vote? Do you ask your staff to do the same?
A. I have not voted since becoming managing editor in 1984 because,
as the final gatekeeper for all coverage in the Post, I do not want to
make up my mind, even in the voting booth, about candidates or issues.
I would be pleased if none of our political reporters or editors voted,
but it would be unreasonable to ask for that (and I remain the final gatekeeper
for all they do). We prohibit all staff members from engaging in any political
activity except voting.
Q. Should a newspaper be written with the thought that most readers
watched the news on TV before going to bed?
A. To the extent that I think about that, I assume that what is seen
on TV news at night creates an appetite for full Post coverage the next
morning.
Q. To what extent does the success of The Washington Post depend
upon its local coverage? Do you have a hard time finding reporters who
want to cover local stories? What innovation in local coverage are you
most proud of over the Downie years?
A. Local news coverage (and circulation and advertising) is the foundation
of everything the Post does. I am pleased that we have been able to expand
that coverage to suburbs in the outer rings of our circulation area and
that our local coverage overall has become deeper, more sophisticated and
more aggressive. Because of the cutbacks, turmoil and silliness in so many
other metropolitan daily newsrooms these days, we are able to hire more
and more very experienced, very talented reporters who love local news
and have played a big role in raising our game here.
Q. How would you describe the Post’s relationship to its readers?
Is that something you worry about, or do you simply feel your job is to
put out the best paper you can?
A. Our relationship with our readership is intense. They are not shy
about letting us know how we are doing and what they like and dislike.
On things like comics and service journalism, we try to give readers what
they want. In news coverage, we do what we think is best for our readers
as well as we can without worrying about whether it is popular or not.
Q. Are you a student of readership surveys? Do you worry about marketing
the Post?
A. I use readership surveys to know who our audience is and could be.
I want to make sure we cover all the subjects of news of importance to
readers and potential readers. I leave marketing of the paper to the marketing
department, except for weighing in against ideas that might compromise
our ethics.
Q. All eyes seem to be on the Los Angeles Times where newsroom leaders
have been asked to work closely with executives on the business side. Is
this something that Don Graham and Len Downie would like to see at the
Post?
A. Don and I strongly believe in the independence of the newsroom in
all decision-making about news content.
Q. You recently promoted Sunday Magazine editor Steve Coll to be
managing editor. What were you hoping to accomplish in this transition?
You passed over lots of strong candidates, most of whom are now reporting
to Steve. Has it been a smooth transition?
A. I wanted Steve’s brilliance, creativity and leadership ability —
and he has paid immediate dividends. We complement each other very well.
He is doing so well everyone in the newsroom now believes he was right
for the job. Many are surprised that I could have made such a smart decision.
Q. The Post is one of the country’s handful of papers with a full-time
ombudsman. Has the assignment had an impact on what the Post prints and
how it writes? What sort of internal tensions arise when the ombudsman
doesn’t like something the Post has done, and says so — internally or in
the paper?
A. I know our ombudsman keeps me on my toes. I frequently follow up
on issues raised by the ombudsman. Editors and reporters frequently are
angered by ombudsman criticism, sometimes rightly, sometimes not. I have
seen good changes made in response to ombudsman criticism, even if the
ombudsman is not credited for it.
Q. The Post has probably saved its readers millions of dollars by
holding its price at a quarter a day. As a consumer, I’m not pushing for
an increase, but I can’t help but wonder — isn’t there pressure to raise
your newsstand price?
A. Don and I want as many people as possible to read the paper every
day. We often are the only two votes for keeping the price at a quarter
— and his vote counts.
Wolman is managing editor of The Associated Press.
