Beginning of end for Miami Herald

Count yourself lucky, but watch your back. Seems like the still-profitable ones are cutting because it's fashionable.

 

I have to agree with Simon. Publishing anything unedited lowers your standards and is a first step into a big bubbling pot of Fuckup Stew.

 

Nothing should be posted on a paper's website without being edited first.

Nothing.

I'm not saying a blog needs to be edited the same way a story would be before it goes in the paper, but it needs to be read at least once.

I'm guessing the hockey writer who went off on ESPN in his blog would agree. I know of countless other writers who have gotten in trouble because of their blog content, including a NFL writer who made a Mons Venus reference about covering the Super Bowl in the last couple days. It lasted on the website for three hours before someone complained and it was taken down.

 

Look, I am not one of the people here who bash you for sport, but you're talking out your ass. Adapt how? Tribune and Cox decided to publish great newspapers, and The Miami Herald was to supposed to do what? Send David Lawrence to break their legs? The Herald was already putting out a great newspaper. They spent a lot of money on the Broward edition and had some incredible editors up there, including, for a time, Paul Anger as editor and then publisher.

The fact is that a shitload of people in Palm Beach and Broward counties do not see themselves as suburbs of Miami, they perceive Miami as a foreign country. The paper is defined by its home base. There is no way around that.

As for crown jewel, the people in KR and in the Herald newsroom were not unaware of all the money being spent and all the Pulitzers being won by Gene Roberts' Philly Inquirer newsroom. Or all the money being lost to put out a great product in Detroit. Or all the profit being made and all the tremendous journalism coming out of San Jose. Or, for that matter, high-quality journalism coming out of Charlotte and St. Paul and Akron. And Long Beach and Boulder and Macon and Gary and Grand Forks. People in Miami's newsroom rooted heavily for the company as a whole, partly because many of them bought stock in the company and followed the price like roto nerds charting players. I can remember answering the phone one day, Edwin Pope calling from Wimbledon. "How'd KR do today?" he asked. In no sense did I see people in Miami believing they were above the rest of the chain. There was a tremendous amount of respect and gratitude for what the other KR papers were doing. A unique atmosphere and a gung-ho mind-set.

 

Frank, as someone who spent time there, I am not talking out of my ass. There was an arrogance by many on the staff that the paper was the greatest newspaper in the state.
Again, there was a time when that was true and certainly when I was there, the paper was incredibily strong.
However, as top flight talent left and the other papers got stronger, the Herald somehow lost its luster.
From where it was to where it is now is a travesity. Several things have brought it to where it is now.
As for the people such as Pope and Anger, you're talking about guys who you didn't mind busting your ass for because they cared about the company and you as an individual.
KR's demise, in my opinion, began with greed. At one time, I thought KR was the best in the country.
Personally, I'm saddened by what has happened in Miami. I have plenty of fond memories there and still have associates at the place and around South Florida.

 

Overworn cliche after cliche.

I'll go with Frank based on his spot-on takes on almost everything and, almost as much, the reams of typed fecal matter you have placed on this board.

 

Has anyone confirmed that K.C. will indeed be the site of some centralized copy-editing scheme? I thought I saw a comment somewhere that it would involve only national and foreign copy. Considering the tiny amount of such copy left in most of these papers, that doesn't sound worthwhile.

 

With all the threads on the dying newspaper industry I didn't want to start a new thread, but I didn't really know where exactly to post this. Nevertheless, I think it's an interesting take and I presume it fits here as well as anywhere else. Please just shoot me now if it has already been linked somewhere else. The whole thing is short and worth the read, but I've included a snippet below.

http://www.talkingpointsmemo.com/archives/2009/01/more_on_papers.php

But, most of these businesses are still fine on an operating basis (i.e., they make money before interest and taxes). Having gone public (seemed like a good idea at the time given the 20% margins, etc.) and subsequently having been leveraged to the hilt, they are getting killed on debt-service as well as in the public equity markets (which prices assets based on future growth potential). For goodness sakes, every single operating entity owned by the now bankrupt Tribune Company is making money - but, Sam Zell (and John Madigan before him) loaded the company up with so much debt, there is no way out other than a bankruptcy judge.

The current owners (particularly the Sam Zell's and private equity firms of the world) don't give a hoot for the public trust aspect of the major metros that they own - unlike the families that started and ran these papers for generations. If they lose all their equity and the bond holders take big hair cuts (I'm talking buzz cut...), that strikes me as a fair and equitable outcome for people who never believed in the missions of the entities they owned.

So, these bankruptcies may in the medium to long run be good for journalism (in the traditional sense).

 

it is hard not to have a pessimistic view

 

Simon, please go away. It's obvious you have personal issues on a blind message board and love to create havoc.
You have NO idea of what Frank and I are discussing and unless you have worked in the area or are from there. The one thing that I think Frank and I agree on is that it's sad to see a paper like the Herald being in its current state.
He has his viewpoint. I have mine. There is no argument or debate about anything.

 

Outsourcing copy editors. Yeah, that can't fail. Why would we want our writers and editors to know the area that their paper(s) covers?