Singleton: Newspapers need to get with the times

I took that as more of a criticism than a solution. Now, if he had said what he meant by writing and editing for the consumer, that's different.

 

I don't work Dean and I wouldn't want to, but it is always interesting, to me, that whenever an owner or management type says newspaper need to change, they always get blasted.
Like the Trib's innovation guy, he says papers need to be reader friendly and he gets slammed on here for saying that, but no one notices that papers really aren't reader friendly.
Or when Murdoch noted that an WSJ article is edited, on average, by 8.3 different editors. Does anyone really think he is wrong when he says that seems excessive?
Back to Dean, the article was only reporting on comments he had made at a Swedish newspaper conference. So it was speech coverage, not a brass tacks approach to what his company is going to do.
So maybe that's why it didn't have many details.

 

OK. Fine. But if Singleton is so bent on newspapers needing to change, what the hell is stopping him. What innovations are his newspapers making? We is he doing to make that happen?

Screw him.

 

No. No. No. No. No.

Work for a Singleton paper, and get back to me.

He deserves NO kudos. He ruins newspapers, he ruins communities, he ruins people's lives. And he doesn't give a shit that he does, as long as he's making money.

Fuck him.

 

Saying "Things need to change" is not helpful whether it's said by a mogul or the lowliest employee. How about "here's how we're gonna change" in simple language? Likewise "more reader-friendly" is a phrase that doesn't mean shit. Be specific, and I'll respect your ideas even if I don't think they'll work.
More management horseshit is the last thing newspapers need. One thing I noticed right away about my non-newspaper job is that the big boss spoke the employees as sentient adults and didn't use jargon. It's no coincidence his company is prospering.

 

What next, the deep thoughts of the venerable newspaper magnate Bob Jelenic on the future of the industry?

 

So what if newspapers start giving readers what they want, which is from my best estimation some unholy union of TMZ meets "Cops." Newspaper become nothing more than celebrity gossip and police beat downs. What service does that provide for the community? Isn't that everything newspapers are not supposed to be? Part of being a journalist and working at a newspaper is giving readers information they need to know. We are supposed to be smart enough to discriminate between what's important and what's garbage. It's pretty obvious if those decisions were left to the masses we'd have nothing but TMZ and "Cops" 24/7. Perhaps we are there already.
This is a totally arrogant view, I realize that. But I also realize there are more important things in the world than Tatum O'Neal, Brittany Spears and Miley Cyrus. Unfortunately this is a minority opinion, or at the very least an unpopular one. Good luck to us all.

 

If by change he means taking several above-average regional dailies in Southern California and turning them into an unscrutable mess, then I guess he has answered his own challenges.

 

They always get blasted because they generally are part of the problem, not part of the solution (see, I can use slogans too!)

Talking about 'change' is nice and all, but having some long-term ideas (rather than gimmicks that are just thrown against the wall to see if they stick), is what's needed.

 

[/quote]

Careful what you wish for, FriendO. Our business would indeed look a lot different without a deranged media baron who can't keep up with his payments and is still trying to expand an already overextended empire.

 

dyepack might have been on to something when he spoke of koolaid.