More DMN updates

[SockPuppet]

Yates and DMN sports are just following the word of the consultants (and their $10 million fee) that told them Cowboys No. 1, Preps No. 2, nobody gives a **** No. 3.
The year Jason White won the Heisman, DMN didn't send Whitmire to NY, but his story wound up with a New York dateline. Editing mistake (they said).
When Oklahoma State changed ADs, Whitmire's story had a Stillwater dateline even though he didn't go there. Editing mistake (they said).

 

[Football_Bat]

Didn't we have a discussion a year ago or so about possible plagiarism and Whitmire's name on an AP story? I know somebody said it was probably a copy editor typing the wrong hot key, but I seem to remember it not being the first time something along those lines had happened.

I don't know Whitmire, so I'm just asking.

If there was anything to that, the DMN suits would have thrown him under the bus then and there as a show trial.

I disagree. We all saw the black eye the Times took with Jayson Blair. I think (if that were true, and that's a big if) that the DMN suits would've made every effort to sweep it under the rug to save face. A "show trial" would've had the opposite effect of calling into question SportsDay's credibility.

You can cut the **** out of staff and pages, but the bottom line is credibility is still the coin of the realm in this biz. That is why it'll be a little while before we see another Blair publicly.

Honesty may be the best policy, but it's bad business.

</cynical *******>

 

[Tracy Ringolsby]

Actually the consultants did not recommend preps No. 2. Recommended emphasis on local coverage, meaning the pro teams and colleges, and had preps down the list because of the diverse interest in each high school and not an overall interest from readers in preps in general.

 

[gandhithegreat]

Actually the consultants did not recommend preps No. 2. Recommended emphasis on local coverage, meaning the pro teams and colleges, and had preps down the list because of the diverse interest in each high school and not an overall interest from readers in preps in general.

this makes a lot more sense...in fact, there may be more interest in golf that preps bull****.

 

[Frank_Ridgeway]

had preps down the list because of the diverse interest in each high school and not an overall interest from readers in preps in general.

I've been arguing this for years for larger papers. With the exception of that rare story with universal appeal, people are interested in their school only. If there is a once-a-decade star in the area, people will want to read about him/her regularly. And maybe a few times a year there is an issues or human-interest story so compelling that there is wide appeal. But the average preps feature is a waste of space. News, gamers, roundups and stats are the way to go.

There is no getting around it, the cost per reader is going to be higher on high school stories than on pro and major-college stories. That doesn't mean we ought to reduce coverage because preps is probably the most effective way to get kids in the habit of reading us. But we need to recognize that the audience is highly fractionalized and that a roundup with 40 schools is going to have a higher readership than a 25-inch feature on one team.

 

[Columbo]

had preps down the list because of the diverse interest in each high school and not an overall interest from readers in preps in general.

I've been arguing this for years for larger papers. With the exception of that rare story with universal appeal, people are interested in their school only. If there is a once-a-decade star in the area, people will want to read about him/her regularly. And maybe a few times a year there is an issues or human-interest story so compelling that there is wide appeal. But the average preps feature is a waste of space. News, gamers, roundups and stats are the way to go.

There is no getting around it, the cost per reader is going to be higher on high school stories than on pro and major-college stories. That doesn't mean we ought to reduce coverage because preps is probably the most effective way to get kids in the habit of reading us. But we need to recognize that the audience is highly fractionalized and that a roundup with 40 schools is going to have a higher readership than a 25-inch feature on one team.

That coverage, to me, is among the very few ways to get young people opening the paper.

 

[2muchcoffeeman]

No. If we're lucky, they'll read it onlline but for the most part, they don't ever bother opening a paper.

 

[Columbo]

No. If we're lucky, they'll read it onlline but for the most part, they don't ever bother opening a paper.

It's an incontrovertible fact: where we live, they read the HS coverage of their schools, and would not crack the paper otherwise.

 

[2muchcoffeeman]

At my last newspaper stop, they did read the HS coverage of their schools. But only online.

 

[SF_Express]

Re: More DMN updates, something NEW

This guy says the Morning News should cut 200 more jobs in editorial, and cut copy editors' pay from $60,000 to $45,000, etc. I'm sure it will be warmly received:

http://www.dmagazine.com//article.asp?articleid=1141

 

[playthrough]

This guy says the Morning News should cut 200 more jobs in editorial, and cut copy editors' pay from $60,000 to $45,000, etc. I'm sure it will be warmly received:

http://www.dmagazine.com//article.asp?articleid=1141

Pretty radical stuff...he also suggests the editorial pages run weekly instead of daily. But this was a great paragraph:

"The News is notoriously dependent on consultants, focus groups, and market research. I am skeptical about all three. Readers don’t know what they want until you give it to them, so why ask them? Great newspapers and magazines operate on the instincts of great editors. Great editors grab readers by the throat. They create stories that have to be read. They create products people can’t do without. If you need focus groups and consultants, what you really need are new editors."

That could go for a lot of papers besides the DMN.

 

[Frank_Ridgeway]

This guy says the Morning News should cut 200 more jobs in editorial, and cut copy editors' pay from $60,000 to $45,000, etc. I'm sure it will be warmly received:

http://www.dmagazine.com//article.asp?articleid=1141

I have to doubt the author's knowledge of the biz when he says high up that classified pays the freight. Even at a classified-heavy place like the NYT Co., classified is about a third of the revenue. It's a bit less elsewhere:

http://phx.corporate-ir.net/phoenix.zhtml?c=105317&p=irol-newsArticle_Print&ID=895881&highlight=

And classified has high labor costs with all those ad-takers working the phones.

Note also that classified revenue includes legals, which is a huge source of income everywhere.

 

[Board Stiff]

"If you need focus groups and consultants, what you really need are new editors."

That. Is. Tremendous.

 

[gandhithegreat]

This guy says the Morning News should cut 200 more jobs in editorial, and cut copy editors' pay from $60,000 to $45,000, etc. I'm sure it will be warmly received:

http://www.dmagazine.com//article.asp?articleid=1141

I have to doubt the author's knowledge of the biz when he says high up that classified pays the freight. Even at a classified-heavy place like the NYT Co., classified is about a third of the revenue. It's a bit less elsewhere:

http://phx.corporate-ir.net/phoenix.zhtml?c=105317&p=irol-newsArticle_Print&ID=895881&highlight=

And classified has high labor costs with all those ad-takers working the phones.

Note also that classified revenue includes legals, which is a huge source of income everywhere.

that's quite a bit steep to question the author's knowledge of the newspaper business because of his assertion that classified's pay the frieght. Even if he's off on his numbers, classified is a large portion of the old business model...and it's just that...old.

His suggestions are right in line in with the re-creation of this business. But from a copy editor's perspective... you get what you pay for. $60K to $45K maybe in line with product regeneration, but that's an unhealthy cut. Getting rid of the old guard and the $200K plus editors should be the No. 1 priority.

You need younger, hungrier and aggressively intelligent people running the show...then in 19 years, it will be a new generation's turn.

 

[Frank_Ridgeway]

that's quite a bit steep to question the author's knowledge of the newspaper business because of his assertion that classified's pay the frieght. Even if he's off on his numbers, classified is a large portion of the old business model...and it's just that...old.

Oh, yes. It pays the freight so much that the San Diego daily started running private-party classifieds for FREE last year. If you followed the business of newspapering at all, you'd have known that.

http://www.signonsandiego.com/news/business/20050828-9999-1b28classif.html

 

[gandhithegreat]

that's quite a bit steep to question the author's knowledge of the newspaper business because of his assertion that classified's pay the frieght. Even if he's off on his numbers, classified is a large portion of the old business model...and it's just that...old.

Oh, yes. It pays the freight so much that the San Diego daily started running private-party classifieds for FREE last year. If you followed the business of newspapering at all, you'd have known that.

http://www.signonsandiego.com/news/business/20050828-9999-1b28classif.html

OK...so, great, Classifieds are not paying the frieght any longer...they used to. I think that's the point you are missing. They started giving the ads free last year, yet they didn't for the previous 138 years the Union Trib has been in business.

So, let's see is it more likely the author of the above is looking forward for The DMN or historically, which you seem to be. History's over, which way are we going now?

You took issue with the author's knowledge based on this? So let's say he got this one wrong, he must certainly have gotten the other four correct...wouldn't you say?

 

[Frank_Ridgeway]

OK...so, great, Classifieds are not paying the frieght any longer...they used to. I think that's the point you are missing. They started giving the ads free last year, yet they didn't for the previous 138 years the Union Trib has been in business.

So, let's see is it more likely the author of the above is looking forward for The DMN or historically, which you seem to be. History's over, which way are we going now?

You took issue with the author's knowledge based on this? So let's say he got this one wrong, he must certainly have gotten the other four correct...wouldn't you say?

It never paid the freight, except at the Auto Trader. Your average 100K daily was running about eight pages of classified against 30 pages of display advertising in an 80-page paper during classifieds' heyday. A major metro maybe 10-12 pages against 40 or 50 pages of display in a 100-page paper, probably 20-40 pages of classified on Sundays in a 200- to 280-page paper. An nice source of revenue, yes. The most important source -- paying the freight -- NEVER. And there are newspapers such as the NYC tabs that run only a few pages of classified per day -- a very insignificant part of the revenue. Even in the 1980s when Dallas led the nation in full-run classified advertising, the revenue was dwarfed by display advertising revenue. You make more money per page on classified, but there are many fewer pages and very few premiums for color or for high-profile positions like back pages and centerspreads.

A fundamental lack of understanding of what brings in the money in this business does make me skeptical about anything he writes, yes. And makes me think you know absolutely nothing about the biz.

 

[oldhack]

Whether classified paid the freight (whatever that means) is beside the point. It was hugely profitable, and newspapers like DMN, LAT and Houston Chronicle that had big classified sections rolled in dough. In the 80s, the DMN regularly ran 80-page real estate class sections on Saturdays and Sundays. The rest of class (jobs, autos, etc) was in other huge sections. What sustained the DMN in its war with DTH was classified, where the News had a 58 percent market share in the early 80s and the two papers were even in display. That apparently is all gone. LA Times regularly ran 32-48 pages of class daily. One day last week it ran 10. Display has taken huge hits with department stores merging and folding, but there have been a few new display categories (cell phones, for one) to ease the blow. The point with classified is that nothing has replaced it. That's in large part why DMN just got rid of 120 people and LAT has cut its news staff from 1,300 to something like 930.

 

[lone star scribe]

So the problem with newspapers' financial stability is copy editors making a living wage at 60K after 10-20 years in the biz? Why does it not surprise me that this theory is proffered by a media owner?

 

[gandhithegreat]

OK...so, great, Classifieds are not paying the frieght any longer...they used to. I think that's the point you are missing. They started giving the ads free last year, yet they didn't for the previous 138 years the Union Trib has been in business.

So, is it more likely the author of the above is looking forward for The DMN or historically, which you seem to be. History's over, which way are we going now?

You took issue with the author's knowledge based on this? So let's say he got this one wrong, he must certainly have gotten the other four correct...wouldn't you say?

It never paid the freight, except at the Auto Trader. Your average 100K daily was running about eight pages of classified against 30 pages of display advertising in an 80-page paper during classifieds' heyday. A major metro maybe 10-12 pages against 40 or 50 pages of display in a 100-page paper, probably 20-40 pages of classified on Sundays in a 200- to 280-page paper. An nice source of revenue, yes. The most important source -- paying the freight -- NEVER. And there are newspapers such as the NYC tabs that run only a few pages of classified per day -- a very insignificant part of the revenue. Even in the 1980s when Dallas led the nation in full-run classified advertising, the revenue was dwarfed by display advertising revenue. You make more money per page on classified, but there are many fewer pages and very few premiums for color or for high-profile positions like back pages and centerspreads.

A fundamental lack of understanding of what brings in the money in this business does make me skeptical about anything he writes, yes. And makes me think you know absolutely nothing about the biz.

OK...let me satisfy your argument, I don't know anything about the biz and the author of this piece is wrong about the classified revenue. I'll give it to you...say nothing more about it...

then the rest of his assertions you would agree are right on. It's time for a fundamental shift in management...