1. Welcome to SportsJournalists.com, a friendly forum for discussing all things sports and journalism.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register for a free account to get access to the following site features:
    • Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
    • Access to private conversations with other members.
    • Fewer ads.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!

Local papers, Gannettized and sanitized

Discussion in 'Journalism topics only' started by HejiraHenry, Apr 5, 2010.

  1. SixToe

    SixToe Well-Known Member

    Isn't this all similar to what the radio stations did when Clear Channel and the other giant corporations bought them?

    Sanitization, all the same shit, corporate-run mentality instead of autonomy, and the loss of local input or flavor?
     
  2. DanOregon

    DanOregon Well-Known Member

    I understand the local control argument - but that's been a joke for years. And I think they mostly meant it regarding editorial pages.
    That said - this might be the first thing the big G has done to actually make it easier on local staffs instead of just telling them what to do and not provide the resources to do it. And while I think more national and world news is a plus - I'm pretty certain it will end up cutting into the paper's news hole budget and won't be seen by big G as an extra.
     
  3. I Should Coco

    I Should Coco Well-Known Member

    Word for word, Six Toe. And depressing as hell.
     
  4. Starman

    Starman Well-Known Member

    they are, and they've been trying for 25 years or more.

    Fifteen or so years ago, I went to work as ME at a joint where the previous ME had had a super-bright idea: "Let's make the paper look exactly like USA Today!!"

    I said to the publisher (a rarity, a reasonably cool guy): "Gannett papers look like USA Today because they are ordered to. We aren't a Gannett paper. Who is ordering us to look like USA Today?"

    He said, "Nobody."

    A couple weeks later, we revamped the whole thing.
     
  5. albert77

    albert77 Well-Known Member

    My understanding is that it will run every day, including Saturdays, Sundays and holidays.

    Personally, I have mixed feelings about it. I like that it provides consistent, more-or-less complete MLB coverage every day, which is a big change for us. In the past, our MLB coverage has consisted of standings every day, but only 1-4 boxes, leaders, roundups and maybe a Braves gamer run haphazardly on a space-permitting basis. Also, our desk people (yes, we still have them) say it's a real easy do and not a lot of extra work.

    On the other hand, the look is jarring; that is, it's out of place style-wise. And even though we're getting an extra page for it (at least for now), it takes away from local autonomy and makes us look more like the local version of McPaper. As someone earlier put it, if I wanted to read USA Today, I'd buy USA Today.

    Having said that, however, now that it's started, I want to see it run every day through the season, and not peter out in mid-July, like some other previous corporate mandates. If we're going to do this, then let's do it every day and be consistent about it.
     
  6. Mark2010

    Mark2010 Active Member

    Hmmmm. Have a Gannett paper less than 100 miles from here that is available on a few racks around town. Will have to check it out.

    Even though it cuts down on work, I'm not so sure I would like not having editorial control over certain pages in my section. For example, if we happen to have a local player who goes 4-for-4 one night for a certain team, I may want to lead the roundup with that game and edit in how he did. Would I still have that option with this sort of page?
     
  7. StaggerLee

    StaggerLee Well-Known Member

    We haven't run it yet, mainly because we don't have the space to run it. We're very local-copy driven, so 75-80% of our stories are staff-written. That doesn't leave us a lot of room for national news, much less an entire baseball page.

    The solution was supposed to be to take comics out of our section and give us that blank page every day for MLB, but it hasn't happened as of yet.

    As far as I know, we have not been mandated to use the MLB page. We were just told it was there for us to use.
     
  8. Desk_dude

    Desk_dude Member

    I think unique baseball pages are thing of the past. The pages often are quite labor intensive, and in these tough times it doens't make sense have people from all the Gannett papers coding up baseball boxes and chopping down roundups.
    It will only make sense, however, if the paper's local team (if it has one) is on a different page or in a spotlight spot on the USA Today pages.
     
  9. eyecu

    eyecu Member

    Sounds like Gannett is walking the same road that Tribune did.

    It started with a baseball page, then eventually other things became must-use pages.

    Keep in mind that Tribune leadership were the minds behind Clear Channel's destruction of radio.
     
  10. Mark2010

    Mark2010 Active Member

    I just saw the example in a Gannett paper not far from here. Don't like it. No photos, one paragraph per game. Basically a stocks page.
     
  11. PaperDoll

    PaperDoll Well-Known Member

    We were ordered to use the Gannett-wide baseball page -- and cut all the local copy down to make sure it fits. Gamers are now capped at 15 inches -- even invitational track meets with 20-plus teams -- and features at 20 inches, unless approved by an editor who will probably not even deign to look at the request.

    My boss has been upping his space requests with that in mind, but I'm not sure whether the aforementioned editor will approve. :mad:
     
  12. Starman

    Starman Well-Known Member

    yep.

    Kill jobs, kill individuality, feed everybody in the goddamn country the same Velveeta.
     
Draft saved Draft deleted

Share This Page