Support for the Media Project comes from the College of St. Rose, Albany, New York,
offering a Master of Arts and Communications to advance careers in media, PR, and journalism,
fuller part-time options, 518-4545143. From Northeast Public Radio,
this is the Media Project, a weekly discussion about issues confronting the media.
I'll tell you, Christ, reliably off the record, about some charming people I have known.
Before I meet politicians and grafters by the score, killers play and fancy,
it's really quite a bar, oh, and these Superman meets up to interesting people.
They wallow in corruption, crime and gore, tingling, linked city desk,
full press, full press, extra extra read all about it, it's a mess meets the test,
only Superman meets up to interesting people. It's wonderful to represent the press.
It's the Media Project, one more chance to gather a little insight and analysis into issues
confronting the media. Who are you? I'm Mike Spain, the Associate Editor of the Times
Union, sitting in for my editor, Rex Smith. Joining me today is WAMC's CEO, Alan Shartuck.
Happy New Year, Alan. Happy New Year to you, Michael. It's always great. We love having you on the
air, unless you are such a bright guy. And also with us is a frequent panelist on the Media
Project, Daly Gazette, editor, Judy Patrick. Welcome, Judy. Happy New Year, Mike.
Are you guys the competitors? Don't you hate each other? We are fierce competitors and good
friends. And we are going to duke it out after this. I don't know the street with snowballs.
And you both live in this strange place, colds connected. It is the only place in the planet with
that name. And we're always that right. The only one in America, because I know Stephen Town is
the only other one and somebody stole the sign saying the only one. You know, there's two peorias.
People say peoria, but it's connected. He is unique. And I know a woman who always says to me,
I'm going to Paris France. And I say, where else? Paris, Texas.
Which there probably are. Paris is all over the world. We're proud,
Skinectadians and we're glad to join you here, Alan. And I think you have some letters to read.
Well, I have a letter and it's a very interesting one. Hello. I recently read a news item on a
website, mediamatters.org. And wonder if any of the Media Project panel had seen it. Conservatives
are launching a new venture called Truth Revolt. That's one word that claims to promote the
anti-media view. They appear to believe that the only reason people with left-wing views
win elections is because the media are dominated by leftists. My question to the media project panel,
is this just another nut job with a beef against the lame stream media in quotes or disturbing new
direction for what seems to path for journalism these days? And then he goes on to basically give us
the whole rationale that this right-wing group is pushing. And so the question for you guys is,
because there have been a lot of studies of this, we know we professors have been looking at it for
years in which there's an attempt to judge who runs the media and reporters are a little to the
left of center, which makes sense because they make less money. And those are re-weighted directly.
And publishers tend to be a little bit more Republican sometimes. And so it's an interesting
question. Is the media loaded to the left? What do you guys think? I'm reluctant to dismiss
something as a nut job right off the bat. But then I read one of the things on the center. It says
the media must be destroyed where they stand. It's mission statement reads, that is our mission at
Truth Revolt. The goal of Truth Revolt is simple unmasked leftists in the media for who they are
destroy their credibility with the American public and devastate their funding bases. It seems
a little nutty to me. Well, if you're on the receiving end, it would seem that way, Mike.
Well, it's not a new idea to come up with a less liberal, more conservative balance. Fox News
was really predicated on that when it began a few years ago. It's been very successful. There's
many publications, there's many networks, there's many talk show hosts that are nationally
syndicated that reflect not so liberal point of view. So I can't really see what the real problem is.
Well, you make a very good point because as we know, and as you just alluded to,
Mike's main, there's still question that the way that it works is that Fox has more
listeners, more viewers than any of the other cable networks do. So how does that fit in? Or maybe
it's never right enough. In other words, maybe Fox is now being accused of selling out.
Well, it sounds like the Congress were there. What we thought were the right wing
are being attacked by the farther right wing. And that's always going to happen in any kind of
political escape. So there are critics of Fox, I suppose, and think that they aren't going far
enough to represent the conservative point of view. But I think just the success you cited
for Fox News shows that there is a diverse audience out there, and there's diverse media
speaking to that audience. And it is in our country predicated on business success. I mean,
if it succeeds, you know, it needs to have a mechanism, a business model that works Fox's works.
They get a lot of advertising, a lot of viewers and works.
No, the letter also notes that the reason left leading people get elected is because of the media.
I don't think that's true. I think that people of both persuasions get elected to office. And
I think in general, the mainstream media treats elections very fairly and balanced. I know you
probably disagree with the opinions of the media. Yeah. But I don't think the only reason
people with left wing views when election is because media is dominated by leftists.
Well, take a look at the New York POST, a name I don't like to pronounce because I find it so
abhorrent. But they sell 700,000 newspapers a day. It is run by a right sports page.
Yeah. Well, and they put a lot. I'm so sorry that I have to mention this in front of Judy. I'm almost
red in the face. But they put a lot of very attractive women scantily clad. It's one of my favorite
words, scantily, you know, in the paper. And that helps also. But it's interesting. You know,
they can be fiercely opposed to political candidacies, but they don't win. In other words,
you know, the daily news at the time, I don't believe it endorsed. I may be wrong, but I don't
think they endorsed the mirror Franklin Roosevelt at any point, but he went overwhelmingly. So it's
not as if the media is one. It's not. It's a whole bunch of voices. That's exactly right. And we
we tend to lump it in and say the media as a, you know, a singular entity, but it is diverse.
And that's what makes it good. And that's what makes it work. Well, I would disagree with you about
one thing, Mike. You're not wrecked. So I'll let you off the hook. But I don't know that it works.
I mean, you know, we're reading a lot about how many people have been fired at every newspaper.
And how the resources are dwindling and how few people are in a newsroom. And we see stories.
I know you guys have seen it this week in which one group is putting out foreign news for
virtually every television station in the country. And they use analysis, which is far from
complete. So I don't know that it works. I'll put it that way. It is a, it is a industry. The media
industry, especially the print media industry that Judy and I represent so well here.
It has been under stress in recent years. There's some positive trends, although they're not at the
profit levels that they were back before the great recession began. The newspaper stocks in 2013.
Oh, through the roof. Well, they're better than they were. I mean, they're, you know, the big
companies like Annette in 2012. It was at 18. It's now at almost 30. And that's a 64% increase
of their stock value. But not back down to when they were really writing. Oh, no, they were,
they were, they were way up in the 40s and 50s, you know, way back in the good old days prior to
the great recession back in the early part of this century, the 21st century. So things have changed
rather quickly. But what it means, I think, and I'd love to hear Judy's opinion, it shows that
newspapers are adjusting to the stresses that they are facing. Obviously, we're doing it with much
fewer resources. That's the negative. But we are coming up with models that are in some cases
around the country and hopefully in the capital region thriving, you know. Yeah, that is the
challenge. These new business models that we're all working on. Sure, we have fewer resources,
but what we're trying to do is be more selective about what we do and how we do stick to the important
issues that we really care about. But we also, as you mentioned, the scannily clad women,
although you won't see many of them in our newspaper, we do have to entertain her off our
audience. So everybody will come to the paper and read it. But this idea of dwindling resources
is sure it's there. What we are is a more efficient industry. But there's also technology. You've
got to realize that 10 years ago, I had, you know, three people cutting out the newspaper and
filing the little paper clips. And now that's all done electronically. So I don't need a person to do
that. So that's a better thing instead of that person is doing something else. Well, in all
deference to both of you who I admire so much, one could go into a newsroom in the old days,
a big old newsroom in any one of a number of papers and see, you know, 50, 60 people
hunkered out over there. The hour I say it typewriters or later computers, you know, doing their thing.
And now sometimes you go into one of those big old newsrooms with the same number of deaths.
You see three guys huddled down at the end of the room. Well, that's true part of that. And I
think Judy addressed it is technology. It allows people to be mobile. There's a lot of reporters
and photographers who never come into the newsroom. I mean, they're out and about. They have their
laptops. They connect. They do their job. They do a great job. But I would be misleading if I said
we had the resources that we had even 10 years ago. It's a diminished newsroom. Well, why would
anybody go into the profession? I mean, you know, here at an I run a journal, the Education
Program too and kids want to go. I mean, they want to have jobs on newspapers. And there are fewer
jobs, obviously, to hire for. But I know that to see any newspaper give a raise to its people
is, you know, a thing sort of of the past. Whereas here at public radio, we gave a 2% raise last
year. We're very proud of it. I think it's bragging. Yeah, well, because we think we think it's not right to,
you know, to I start I predict that you're going to see a continuation of this realignment of the
print newspaper industry, you know, and the media industry in that there will be more stability.
And with that will come some growth. It'll be new. It'll be different. I can't predict exactly
what it will be. But I think the trends are mixed. But it's the beginning of the year. I want to be
optimistic. And I'm optimistic that this will be a continuation of improvement in the business
side of newspapers, which would without the business, without a successful, you know, margin, you're not
going to have any way to fulfill your mission. Are you guys selling advertising, front page advertising
in a way that didn't exist in the old days? I mean, you know, it bothers me when I open my favorite
newspaper here in Albany. And then my favorite newspaper is connected to, you know, the Gisette or
the Times Union. And I am and there's some kind of cover covering half of the newspaper or there's
a stick. You know, you have a lot of spadeas. Another one for the Spadeas. A Spadeas, a term for that
fold of the spadeas. Spadeas. Or a three page wrap. There's different names for it. But I,
well, you're referring to as an advertising page and a half that's folded around the front page
and you have to kind of peel it off. I don't like it. Yeah, it's some people do object to it. But it is,
it gives a, well, I will say this, it gives an advertiser a very prominent location without
interfering with our front page. Well, and it appears with me, I'm trying to read the headline
and this thing is over there or they've slapped some kind of stick them thing on top of you know,
let me go back. Without it without a profit margin, you're not going to be able to fulfill your
mission. This is something that is a very premium location that advertisers pay. Well, sure. And
I know you're not Rex and I'm sorry for doing this to you, Mike. But, but obviously, because,
you know, with him, I would do it with the light. But there is a question in my mind as to whether
or not, and I'll tell you what he would say. Well, why don't you tell me what he would say?
He would say, and what you don't take on the writing on WMC. That's what he would say.
Exactly right. Yeah, we're having a very serious conversation in our boardroom just last
week or the week before about front page advertising because we're going to, we added a new place on
the top of our page. And we're going back and forth about probably 45 minutes later. We,
someone looks on the wall, the first copy of the daily Gazette back from 1880, 1890s and right
on the front page is a very big ad. Isn't that interesting? The first time, Jr., where it's the
Albany morning times, which started in 1856, was basically all ads. And then they ran out of ads,
so they went out and found some information to put in there to fill up where the ads weren't.
And then they said, hey, you know, if we could get some more information, we could maybe, you know,
make this thing go. And that's sort of how it got going. So advertising, even on the front page,
is not new and unique. It's all part of trends. And the bottom line is that without advertising
support, the cost of reducing a newspaper, a quality newspaper would be prohibitive. And people
wouldn't pay it. Well, but as you guys give more and more, give way more and more and do this more
and more. Doesn't that take on sort of a life of its own in that the expectations of the advertisers
so that they can get more prominent spacing in the old days? Newspaper would say, no, you can't
have that because, you know, it's the integrity of the newspaper and all the rest of it. Now you say
you can't have it. In the case of public broadcasting, we say we tried to keep our underwriting
announcements at 11 words. I have been counting more than 11 words lately. Well, there is a drift
and it goes back and forth Alan. And I don't think it compromises it only supports the integrity of
the journalism when you pull past that little page in the front. I did want to say you're listening
to the media project, a program about issues confronting the media. I'm Mike Span, associate editor
of the Times Union, filling in for Rex Smith, along with Alan Shartock and Daly Gizette, editor
Judy Patrick. And you can share your thoughts with us anytime at media at wamc.org. Now you both
are top editors. Well, I have you both here at your newspapers. Oh, I have a boss. You're the top
editor at the Gizette. Right. And if you ever look at each other's papers in the morning and say,
darn, or something worse, darn, you know, they got a story we didn't get.
My husband can attest that that does happen at my house in the morning over over breakfast.
Yes. Well, not over breakfast before breakfast. First thing I do when I come downstairs in the
morning is go to the front door, pick up both papers and kind of open them up and kind of look at
the two covers, pull off those little tabs that you just talked about. And sometimes it's, oh,
you know, so we win some, we lose some. You get bling from above. The publishers ever call you
and say, you know, how come they have that you don't? I think we're the ones who call other people
and say, why do they have it? And we don't. Right. So there are people who have beats as we say.
Right. Our publishers are, I'm sure my publisher is definitely interested in what's in the paper
in keeping us current and not getting scooped, but he leaves that to me. I think that's a,
that's true at the time. She knew the publisher rarely will complain if he sees or sees an omission.
He really does leave it up to the newsroom and in the same way that Judy just described at the
Daily Gazette. And it's the editors that are turning to their colleagues and asking why we miss
something. And you know, that is a reality of a diminished staff in a newsroom. You're a little more
understanding and it used to be if we didn't have it every day in front of everybody else,
it was the end of the world. Now it's, well, what can we do to take that story back, take it
a further step, analyze it, do it better than the competition, do it. And you know, those are
the discussions. And I think in the end, the public is the beneficiary because we're both coming at it,
we're coming at it, trying to make more of it than the competitor did and the public is the
beneficiary. And I think it is a successful system. Flood and not perfect, but successful.
Well, you know, what we try to preach around here at public radio is the guy or the woman who has
the beat has to take ownership of the beat. In other words, the editor can't be the person who
said why weren't you there? Well, you say the person who's covering city hall or some people say
in different cities, silly hall and say, you know, where was that so? Well, I can't be two places,
so I can't be three places at once. And that's an interesting issue, isn't it? I find that the
reporters today, I mean, Judy, you can weigh in are more protective and more aggressive about their
beats. Often they will come up to you and say, Oh, man, I didn't have that story. And you'll be
trying to say, well, it's reasonable. You had this, this, this, and this and you were tweeting and
you were posting on the blog and, you know, and doing some photography, editing some video, whatever,
it's completely reasonable that you might have missed one story. What can we do to come back at it?
You know, the reporters are well aware of competition. Have you guys ever fired anybody for
not getting enough stories? There's an awful lot of silence. Well, their purse lips in the
moment. Well, if somebody doesn't get enough stories, if someone is not productive, that might lead
to their departure, you know, during a probationary period or over time. But, you know, no, the,
the sort of motion picture era image of a editor coming in with a cigar and saying, right,
take you blew it, buddy, you're out of here. You know, that doesn't happen. Yeah. Yeah.
I, you know, if I or someone for getting scooped once, if they get scooped for a whole year,
six months or even three months, you might want to read, either reassign them or,
put them on the television, they want to consider another career. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah.
Well, because I run the legislative Gazette newspaper, which is a journalism training project,
there's nothing that our kids aspire to more than working for either of you. But is there too much
journalism education in the country where, you know, too many young people are being produced
and therefore disappointed with the lack of jobs? You know, I don't think so at all. Remember,
it's still a very noble profession with a really interesting career ahead of you. Every day,
it's news. So you get to work it along enough. Some politicians will hire you as a flak.
That happens. And triple your salary. Probably not triple, but double sometime. But I tell
kids in college that there are plenty of jobs out there if you're good. If you can write well,
if you're enterprising, if you're thoughtful, if you know, if your news judgment is good or
is developing, there are plenty of jobs out there for good people. Yeah. There is certainly more
difficulty today, finding placement at a daily newspaper, but we have hired young people,
bright young people in the last few years that have very promising careers. There are other paths,
there's other value to having a communications education. You can use it in, if you go into law,
if you go into, if you go into, if you go into law, you can do science,
if you go into communications. All of those. I think it's a great background to have and some
people will work at their entire career and some people will use it as a launch pad and do another
career that's related. But being able to communicate well and to tell it on different media is,
those are fantastic skills to have and I don't think that it's a waste to go for that kind of
education. Will Mr. Moderator or any other subject willing? Got a few more minutes. Well, you know,
we were talking before about Fox News, but there was a little controversy in the last week about
MSNBC, which is kind of the liberal, you know, opposite of Fox News. Doesn't do nearly as well.
No, but it does have a wide audience and one of its popular hosts there is Melissa Harris Perri,
and she ended up committing a faux pas. She made fun on the air of a photo of Mitt Romney's
extended family because one of the children in it was African-American and adopted child,
and she welded into the Sesame Street song. One of these things is not like the other.
She took a lot of criticism from that and she immediately apologized, but it does show that
in trying to be entertaining and trying to be provocative on these sort of right and left
cable channels, you can really offend people and step outside of, you know, civility and journalistic
bounds. And she herself is a Mormon and she's African-American in a family that where she was
adopted by whites. So she related to it very much, but she made fun of it and she apologized. It
was an interesting development. You know, it was I went and looked at the piece again,
and for the media project did my homework a little bit. And the whole premise of the section
that they were doing, and they were taking photographs of politicians and trying to write or
verbalize funny captions for the mosque. So they were setting themselves up in the first place,
but someone picked this picture and they went, said obviously a faux pas, as someone who's not
used to talking on the radio and is doing so now I know that that can happen, but these are
real professionals. They should know that. Well, it raises the question as to whether she knew
darn well what was going to happen. There is always this look, you're going to be a host for MSNBC,
you got a fire up the troops, you got to give them red meat. That's exactly what I'm trying to do.
You really have to push, you know, I am so disillusioned. But they're pushing the envelope exactly
but peel to their audience. At the same time, they're walking on that line of being a
opinion person, a commentator versus a journalist. Yeah, this isn't journalism. I think this is
just entertainment. Well, you know, one of the things that annoys me about all you people,
the most is this business of the model with media. False distinctions between entertainment and
journalism. You know, what I love is that is that you go around both of you and Rex too and say
there's a guy on the New York POST of all places, you know, who say, that guy is an
adjournalist, he's a professor or he's a this or he's that, you know, who gets the define?
Who's a journalist? There is no license to become a journalist. And it's a profession that
has standards and it's really governed by both the industry itself and by critics from the
outside. People who are professors and people who are consumers of the media. Yeah, those who can
are journalists and those who can't are professors critiquing. Well, I think you can judge it by
the work too, but what you're right by what you say. Well, some can. Some can. Well, it's, I mean,
some people who are judging from the outside. Yeah, well, I mean, I don't know that everybody has the
like the first story we started with, which is that there are people on the right who are saying
that isn't journalism. Well, entertainment, as Judy said before, is part of journalism.
But that just about wraps up this week's media project. We didn't even talk about anything topics.
Some of the best topics I should say that we're out of time. Thanks to
Dele Gazette editor Judy Patrick and WAMC's own Alan Chartalk. I'm Mike Spain associate editor
of the time, Julian. And we wish you a very happy 2014. Indeed.
I'm a man.
It's wonderful.
Who represent the president.
Now you remember Mrs. Sadie Smuggering.
She wanted money to buy a new fur coat.
To get insurance, she employed spelled a green.
She up and cut her husband's only throat.
She chopped him in the fragments. She stuffed him in a trunk.
She shipped it all back yonder to her uncle in Podong.
Now news Superman meets such interesting people.
It must have startled poor old Sadie's aunt.
Tingling a lingon city dust.
Pull the press. Pull the press.
Extra extra extra.
CC BY-NC-SA 4.0