Newspaper endorsements going against the will of your subscribers

I believe Junior is pulling most of the strings now, but I haven't asked that question specifically.

 

With regard to politics: O. Nutting makes the calls. All. Of. Them.

 

That comes as no surprise. I did a brief stint 2-3 years ago as co-acting ME of my old Ogden shop between hires. Wheeling made available a handful of editorials per month that could run if we wanted them -- my old boss used to call them "Obama and his cronies" letters because that phrase was bound to appear in there somewhere. We knew on which side our bread was buttered. The U.P. is probably comparably socially conservative to West By God, but more prone to vote Democrat because of significant (but not as much as it used to be) influence from organized labor (mining) and environmental concerns.

 

In 2008 my paper endorsed Obama over Hillary in the Democratic primary and we lost exactly one customer over it. Our circulation director showed me the stop. (The customer resumed service about eight weeks later.)

Endorsements are no better than pick-it lines. If it causes you grief and has no effect on the outcome, what's the fucking point?

 

Sheldon Adelson has no idea what you're talking about.

 

My former newspaper just endorsed Hillary Clinton and the Trump supporters are out in full force on the paper's Facebook page, threatening to cancel subscriptions, etc. Some of the comments are comical, such as the woman who said she never heard of a newspaper endorsing a candidate until Obama. Some are downright disturbing.

 

The Richmond (Va.) Times-Dispatch won't do endorsements after this election cycle. The president/publisher of the paper explains why:

Tom Silvestri column: Why 2018 will be the last year the RTD makes editorial endorsements

In a nutshell: We live in divisive times, and readers don't understand the difference between an editorial board and the "objective" journalists in the newsroom.

For whatever his longwinded reasons, I agree. The dwindling time/resources/newshole that newspapers have should be used for reporting on government and politics, not endorsements.

 

Newspaper endorsements may have some impact in crowded primaries or way down ballot races because they can give a candidate name recognition they might not otherwise get. Aside from that, I question if they have ever affected a single vote.

 

I don’t believe Ogden papers are required to publish specific editorials, including endorsements.

I was in that chair for a presidential election. There was no directive from on high.

 

I agree with Silvestri's rationale: A lot of people can't, or refuse to, separate a news organization's editorial and news department. Many voters are set in their ways, and no newspaper will change their mind. All papers, in this day and age, should halt endorsements.

 

I don't care who or what an newspaper endorses - but you better make a compelling argument. Too many endorsements read like the editor had to write it against his or her will and wrote a non-sensical endoresment to undermine the decision.

Surprised an endorsement hasn't been formatted like

Five Reasons We Think People Should Vote for Jim Bob.

Three Reasons why people Shouldn't vote for Cletus.

 

In short: people are stupid.