Breaking: Brian Tierney Woefully, Nay, PAINFULLY In Denial
Coming off like a coach giving a pep talk when we’re down 15 points with two minutes left on the clock, Brian Tierney attempted to bro down with us and explain just what the heck is UP with the newspaper industry. After namechecking the holy trinity of the Eagles, Neil Young, and, um, church, he tried his best to assuage our fears. Yeah, all that talk about newspapers in a death spiral? Huey! All that talk about citizen journalism being the new frontier? Hogwash!
“The Inquirer has been around for 180 years, and we’re committed to making certain it’s around for 180 years more.”
Let’s back up a bit. We can barely stomach the backwards model of newspapers TODAY. The thought of our great-great-great-grandkids having to deal with this is a little too much for us to digest right now.
[Previously: Breaking: Inky/DN Layoffs Being Handed Out As We Speak]
December 22nd, 2008 at 4:46 pm
Has Philebrity ever provided an exegesis of what y’all find so terrible about the “backwards model of newspapers today”? I understand, and sympathize, with the Brian Tierney is an asshole vibes, but I can’t say I understand the general newspaper industry bashing. It seems like you’re rooting for the industry to fail, and I just don’t understand how that’s a positive thing. Say all you want about the benefits of new media, but there’s no fucking way a handful of blogs can have the resources necessary to cover a city as large and complex as the 215, at least not in the short term. So what’s the beef, exactly?
December 22nd, 2008 at 5:06 pm
I agree with you, ResIpsaLoquitur. I find this blog, and many others, informative and entertaining, but they can’t replace a daily newspaper. As a matter of fact, most blog posts are regurgitated newspaper stories with commentary added; very little original content from blogs. So dailies do all the grunt work of reporting, interviewing, etc. and blogs get the traffic.
December 22nd, 2008 at 5:24 pm
You raise a great question! I can’t speak for Joey, but I have been frustrated with the way newspapers have stubbornly refused to adapt to the changing journalism landscape. They’ve dragged their heels at every chance and just make terrible business decisions all around. As for our Inquirer, they launched a luxury magazine during a recession. Whaaa? They announced that they will post stories in the paper first and THEN publish them online. That’s just backwards and punishes their online readers when they should be courting them.
And, reading Tierney’s opinion piece today straight-up baffled me. If I am informed correctly, they just laid off a significant chunk of their creative staff. It IS a dire time for them. And, it seems naive to expect newspapers as we know them to be anything like the news organizations that will exist in 200 years. Especially when the market is clearly telling them that their model is outdated.
He seems to be looking backwards at the way newspapers existed 25 years ago, not the realities of news distribution today. After I read his piece, I got the sense that he is tethering himself to the paper selling business, not the news distribution business.
As for why Joey feels the way that he does, I’d suggest searching the site with term “Tierney.” That should keep you busy for a while.
December 22nd, 2008 at 5:56 pm
Ekr, you are deluding yourself if you think the local daily papers “do all the grunt work.” The majority of hard news stories are from the wire services, what’s left is regurgitated press releases from Entertainment to the Business section. The only true local reporting is done by the Sports sections, and I for one could do without more E-A-G-L-E-S idiocy.
December 22nd, 2008 at 6:15 pm
I like buying newspapers and reading them during the day. I also seem to be able read longer articles and stay interested when they’re in print versus the computer screen.
God forbid newspapers ever fold… TV news hardly ever re-visits a story with in-depth updates, if they’re ever in-depth to begin with.
Also, anybody else notice the Inquirer jettisoned the Sunday horoscopes this past weekend? or maybe they moved ‘em and I just couldn’t find them.
December 22nd, 2008 at 6:24 pm
Gotta add…
BRIAN TIERNEY IS AN IDIOT!
December 22nd, 2008 at 6:44 pm
Actually, Timo, that’s not altogether correct. There’s a two-way relationship between wires and newspapers. In the case of a service like Reuters, it’s primarily one-way — they write it, the newspaper that subscribes to them publishes it — but that in turn can generate the next story on the topic at a newspaper, perhaps even the one that initially used the Reuters story.
In the case of AP, it’s even more symbiotic. They’re a cooperative, owned by the newspapers and radio stations that are also, at the same time, AP’s customers. In that relationship, a newspaper that is an AP member could report and write a story (yes, all on its own) that might have statewide or national implications. AP would then have the rights to take that local reporting, rewrite/repackage it, and put onto its AP wire — which then can be used by any other paper that subscribes.
FWIW.
December 22nd, 2008 at 7:01 pm
Anna, I agree with you generally on the stupidity of the business decisions of most media companies. The industry obviously has to adopt in the face of the changing media landscape and technological environment, and the terrible business decisions at the top are destroying many of these institutions before they ever really have a chance to adapt. Just look at what piss poor management and financial decision making has done for the Tribune Company. The Chicago Tribune and LA Times continue to earn a healthy profit, but the morons at the helm have created a corporate conglomerate so ridden with unmanageable debt that they’ve been forced into bankruptcy. It’s disgusting. In the next year, we’re likely to come dangerously close to having large cities in the U.S. which no longer are served by a daily newspaper. That should frighten the hell out of everybody. I won’t be mourning the loss of 75% of the material in your average newspaper, but that other 25% of material is irreplaceable at the moment.
Timo, it should also be pointed out that while most of the international, national and state news is primarily wire-driven in the local papers these days, it is still local reporters on the city beat that are doing all the grunt work with regards to local news reporting. We’d know very little about what’s happening on the local level – politically or otherwise – if it weren’t for the local newspaper.
December 22nd, 2008 at 7:29 pm
Is that why they’ve been winning so many Pulitzers lately?
December 22nd, 2008 at 7:39 pm
I just checked http://www.pulitzer.org/awards/2008. The Milwaukee Journal, the Sacramento Bee, Birmingham (AL) News, the Denver Rocky Mountain News, and the L.A. Weekly (!) each have more Pulitzers than the Inquirer and the Daily News. Where is the good writing?
December 22nd, 2008 at 8:09 pm
ResIpsaLoquitur, thanks for being so articulate and passionate about this issue.
As an avid news consumer, I’m not saying that I WANT any newspaper to go out of business. I do believe that the local media fulfills a vital role in informing the public and shaping our discourse.
However, I can criticize the way Tierney chooses to manage his newspaper, especially when he’s made so many terrible blunders in assessing our current news climate.
But, I don’t seem to dread a world without local papers the same way you seem to. With the proliferation of so many tools and services, most of the news I get about my neighborhood is from message boards, posts, blogs, etc. That’s part of the citizen journalism aspect I mentioned in my post.
Ultimately, people want news, and it’s essential to find a model that will work if the Inky truly expects to be around in 180 years.
December 23rd, 2008 at 10:19 am
Rep, you’ve read sweeney’s previous writings right? You do know he’s worked a friggin’ ton elsewhere before giving up, the wire style, on it all.
Dudes even got a beeper now I heard.