City Beat names names

http://www.citybeat.com/cincinnati/blog-1784-more-layoffs-at-the-enquirer.html

Sadly, too many of our media outlets in America today are more interested in inciting the masses than informing the public through the never-ending pursuit of truth. These are very scary times we live in. I only hope that rational, thoughtful people do not stay silent out of fear. That would give the opposition far too much "respect" it so desperately craves.

 

^Since when has the mainstream media been focused on the never-ending pursuit of truth? I think that they are pretty good at what they do, which is reporting the news that interests the most people.

The central purpose of the news media is to pursue truth. I've discussed this with many friends whom I consider quality reporters in the mainstream media. We all agreed that is our central mission. And having worked as a staff writer in the mainstream media for 15 years, I learned something very early on:  everyone can see the same thing differently, experience the same thing very differently and recount it very differently. A fact is only a widely held belief. A police officer is often seen as a credible source. But is he? How do we know? What did other witnesses see? So how do you know what really happened and therefore report the news accurately? By pursuing truth. It is the fundamental goal of every reporter who understands his or her job, and who isn't motivated by themselves or by others to be fair and balanced simply for the goal of trying to find at least one person out of a crowd who has a different opinion. Too often I encounter reporters (aka story tellers) who seek out that dissenting opinion to add controversy to their story because, in their mind, any good story worth reading has controversy. But sometimes good news is worth reading, and I enjoy reading it. When bad news is constantly being forced down my throat, such as the Cleveland Plain Dealer's lack of coverage of Cleveland's many construction projects happening (until the PD finally started writing about them recently), I start to wonder why. Same for the Cincinnati Enquirer's coverage of the streetcar project and of rail in general, of which I'm very familiar. When I see them make mistakes and worse, repeat them despite efforts by me and others to point them in the direction of accurate information, I also start to wonder why. Are they on a mission other than the pursuit of truth? If so, what is it?

^Naw, the central purpose of the news media, like any business, is to make money.

 

Now some media institutions place a high priority on maintaining credibility, while some others specialize in entertainment. The mainstream media does some of each, trying to balance information and entertainment content that is most interesting to the most people.

 

Most people aren't interested in rail or urban development. Sorry! Human interest stories, for example, a shooting on Fountain Square, get a lot more attention.

 

 

 

 

I'm glad you're here to tell me about a business I've worked in on a full-time basis for 15 years and as a freelancer since. A suggestion for you: pretending you know what you're talking about doesn't make it so.

 

And I never said most people cared about rail. Maybe they do. Maybe they don't. Hard for me to know since I haven't met most people. But I am able to utter the three words that you apparently have most difficulty with: "I don't know." But if you don't know, don't offer an opinion on it. And as a media outlet, if one doesn't know, then it should try to learn as much as it can about it before publishing anything. If you don't think the issue is worth your time to research it, then why bother covering the story let alone taking such a blatantly biased, ignorance-based approach to covering it?

 

BTW, from my experience in mainstream media reporting, I am convinced the lazy/sensationalist press is an accomplice to the rise of ignorance/hate-based political movements such as the tea party. I watched my colleagues aid and abet it throughout the 1990s.

The purpose of for-profit media companies, especially those that are publicly traded, is to make money.  That's the sad truth.

Who would have thought that state-controlled media would have some advantages over for-profit enterprise?

The purpose of for-profit media companies, especially those that are publicly traded, is to make money.  That's the sad truth.

 

It may be the purpose, but the fact of the matter is that the news media receives certain protections and benefits that other for-profit companies do not.  (See, e.g., the First Amendment, or legal tools such as protection of confidential sources.)  That special treatment suggests that the media is viewed differently from other for-profit businesses; I think it's fair, given this special treatment, to hold them to a different standard than I would just any for-profit business.

The purpose of for-profit media companies, especially those that are publicly traded, is to make money.  That's the sad truth.

In today's Enquirer, stories about a carjacking on Newport's Riverboat Row and Hoffbrauhaus bouncers beating up patrons were buried on the back page of the local section.  In fact it looks like the Newport police have covered up repeated problems which is why the lawyers who happened to get punched went to the state liquor agency. 

Ha, that Hofbrau incident in the article happened right in front of me and my buddies as we were leaving. The guy kept saying, "I'm a lawyer!" We were laughing our asses off. All the guy's buddies busted out their camera phones and taped it.

Ouch. I've heard of similar incidents, and I stopped going there once the crowd became more rowdy and ... uncivilized. It's like an extension of that bull riding bar across the street.

The lawyer from the incident didn't get punched, just choke-slammed.

Ha, that Hofbrau incident in the article happened right in front of me and my buddies as we were leaving. The guy kept saying, "I'm a lawyer!"

 

Did he not think they were hitting him hard enough?

Downtown Cincinnati 'a safe place to be'

Kind of a weird article. Compares the CBD to Florence, Westchester & Mason.

It talks about "Downtown" but in graphs lists crime stuff from OTR & CBD. Thing is, I think most people lump OTR & CBD together.

http://news.cincinnati.com/article/20110902/NEWS01/109040324

"The success and vitality of Cincinnati's urban center impacts the sustainability of the suburbs," said West Chester Township Administrator Judi Boyko.

 

Wow. Did that really come from a West Chester Township Administrator?

Very solid piece of journalism by the Enquirer. The writer actually did some in-depth research, rather than just quoting opposing "he said / she said" soundbites from activists. I wish we'd see more of this type of writing about urban issues in Cincinnati, instead of the usual hit pieces.

So, today was the first time that I heard of the "empty desk" policy at the Enquirer's offices. I was talking to someone who worked there, and she said that the newsroom was "starkly" empty compared to years past - say, 1995 when it was really bustling. Their policy, which is really quite depressing, is if there is an empty desk adjacent to yours, fill it up with mementos and objects to make it look "lived in." As in, put photos of family members on the desk, papers, anything because there is nothing that depresses morale more than seeing a lot of vacant seats.

 

Was also asking her about who covers what, and most of the specific reporters - ones that covered topics like medical news, transportation and so forth, were long ago laid off. And those topics have been given to less experienced writers or those who have no working knowledge of the topic - e.g. Barry Horstman.

 

Kind of depressing when you realize how far the Enquirer has fallen in employment numbers alone, and that about a fourth of their building is now for lease. And that production of their paper is being outsourced...

Seems like they were a bit too hasty in the move to a new building, while the old Enquirer HQ remains vacant.

Will be interesting to see how this changes the comments section. From what I've seen on the local television stations using Facebook for comments, idiots will still be idiots.

 

 

Sounding off - without the ugliness

 

The community really only benefits from our news coverage when you engage. Our most satisfying moments come when our coverage prompts you to respond - to attend an important community meeting, write to a community leader, debate, donate or contribute, or join a cause.

 

Today we have digital tools to help you do that in ways we never could before. We offer you regular opportunities to chat with newsmakers, add pros and cons to a debate, and more.

 

Next week we're making a change to the oldest of these tools - our online comments.

 

Starting Dec. 5, we will no longer allow anonymous comments at Cincinnati.com. You will use a Facebook account to post comments on stories. That is the best way today to ensure that people use their real names. If you don't use Facebook, it's easy to set up an account.

 

Cont

I don't see what stops people from creating fake Facebook accounts.  The much better plan would have been to have everyone register a credit card number, require use of the credit card holder's name as it appears on the card, and charge $1 per comment. 

^ I'm with Jake on this one. Or alternately, charge a nominal fee per month for "premium" access that allows commenting on articles and maybe other exclusive features, with comments appearing under the name on the card. Who knows, the Enquirer might even be able to make some money in the process, which could fatten the Gannett CEO's bonus the next time they lay off a couple dozen reporters.

The vast majority of the comments are already "OMG! I will never use Facebook! I am boycotting the Enquirer!"  I love the fact that most commenters are whining about the loss of anonymous comments.  Use your real name or keep your fringe opinions to yourself.

 

Jake, I believe Facebook now has a number of measures in place to prevent users from creating duplicate accounts, such as requiring a cell phone number to sign up and rejecting some accounts with obviously fake names (although I don't think that measure has been enforced in quite some time).

 

 

The idea that FaceBook is somehow your gateway to the internet is pretty weird. Also, after seeing the rise & fall of MySpace, counting on these services seems kinda lame.

I tried to set up a FaceBook account with a really obvious fake name like Justin Time or something & they rejected it. That was awhile ago, tho.

Anyway, nothing is stopping anybody from setting up a site or blog to make all the comments they want to on nay topic under the sun.

Well, it seems that this is what Gannett is going with - the Courier Journal asked its readers their opinions (as if they had any input since it was a corporate thing), and will be switching from Pluck (an internal commenting system) to Facebook at a future point. Some sites, like the Herald-Leader - owned by McClatchy, use Disqus, which allows for a Disqus, Twitter, Google (and by extension, Google+) and Facebook account.

 

Currently, Facebook requires a valid phone number. I'm not for sure if it sends anything to it, like a verification code by voice or text, but some professional networking sites do that. Requiring a credit card to further verify the status would be even better.

 

I don't mind Facebook integration only because it is the dominant platform for social media, and is something that newspapers have been embracing as an extension of their in-house media distribution networks. It is also incredibly easy to manipulate and integrate Facebook's Open Graph protocol.

The idea that FaceBook is somehow your gateway to the internet is pretty weird.

 

For a while it was AOL, then Yahoo. Facebook seems to be taking a bigger and bigger share all the time. It should be interesting to see what happens.

 

 

Many years ago when I was setting up a music page on Facebook, I had to take a photo of my drivers license and send it to them before I was allowed to post MP3s. It seems the cell phone number verification has replaced that in terms of identity verification.

They just call you (immediately after you click 'call me') and an automated system speaks a numerical code for you to type into a box on the site. I've had to do it with several websites for my business.

I am not sure of the long term impact of switching to Facebook, but it was interesting to see these few comments on an article about ongoing developments at the banks.  I am certain one week ago there would have been 20 negative, asinine comments by now - I had gotten out of the habit of checking them due to this very reason but was curious and found only 3 positive comments.  One even makes reference to the missing trolls:

http://news.cincinnati.com/comments/article/20111206/BIZ01/312060162/Progress-continues-Banks

No more career politician's

Jeez, it's like night and day over there!

It's pretty dead over there.

In 1 discussion, somebody apparently looked at the profile of an opponent & made a comment about the guy's job. How soon til people start bringing in opponents friends & family?

Deleting the over 1,400 comments opposing the decision is priceless.

It's pretty dead over there.

In 1 discussion, somebody apparently looked at the profile of an opponent & made a comment about the guy's job. How soon til people start bringing in opponents friends & family?

Deleting the over 1,400 comments opposing the decision is priceless.

 

I have the name of the company I work for linked to my Facebook page for networking purposes and should I post a comment, not only would my full name be there, but so would my employers name right next to it. This makes me concerned that my opinions could be interpreted as my employers...and I work for a pretty large, sometimes controversial company with a huge presence in Cincinnati. For this reason alone, I have not been using the new comment system, although I do think it's a fantastic idea and it's apparent that it's already working. I think that those individuals who troll the comments page will probably figure out a way to make a fake Facebook profile and just start using that though...it's only a matter of time.

well, the vast majority of people here are anonymous....

Maybe the Enquirer should have just hosted meet & greets?

I've noticed some bugs in the switch to Facebook. I've seen the comments from several articles disappear. Example is the article "Progess continues at The Banks" had comments yesterday but currently I see nothing.

 

I use Safari, Firefox, and IE8 daily and sometimes comments will show up in one browser but not another.

>well, the vast majority of people here are anonymous....

 

 

Well this place is moderated so if you use multiple user names you will be tossed.

 

 

Today's Enquirer had a feel good letter by Stan Chesley next to a letter about the smoking ban.  Then an article on page C2 about how Chesley is about to get disbarred.

My biggest complaint on the Enquirer site is how articles can disappear or be moved in less than a day.

What does the Enquirer owe Smitherman & Finney?

 

http://news.cincinnati.com/article/20111218/NEWS01/312180027

I saw that.  Look at how Smitherman + Coast once again constitutes the ENTIRE opposition to something, and the reporter can't make the connection that the two are in bed. 

The Enquirer's slide into irrelevance continues:

 

Cincy reaches final deal for smaller format; production closing by Q4 2012 could cost 200 jobs

 

At this rate, the Enquirer will soon be nothing more than a two-page pamphlet that gets folded into issues of USA Today.

Their deadline is going to have to be at least 2 hours earlier in order to compensate for driving all of the newspapers down to Cincinnati.  I can't wait for the first time I-71 is shut down by snow and no old people get their papers. 

"Content will provide more in-depth coverage of topics that our readers are passionate about and provide information that can’t be found anywhere else."

 

How will this happen when there is very little investigative journalism that once defined newspapers? They were the watchdogs of the past.

Their deadline is going to have to be at least 2 hours earlier in order to compensate for driving all of the newspapers down to Cincinnati.  I can't wait for the first time I-71 is shut down by snow and no old people get their papers. 

 

Meanwhile, people like me will incur $5 charges against my paycheck for each missed paper complaint. Once the warehouse in Tobasco closes, I'll have to look for another job.

To illustrate just how deeply The Enquirer fails at its stated mission, take a look at this:

 

Back then the public had a better idea of how municipal finances functioned because of these annual reports in the city's papers.  Not only is there a useful description of types of debt, in the article on the right we see exactly where all of the city's cash is -- divided between any number of local banks.  Now the public is just plain superstitious about government, and easy prey for anti-tax groups. 

Gotta have more room for Kardashian news. I remember that the local paper in my grandparents' part of the state (the Monroe County Beacon) was still publishing things like the financial reports of the local school districts in the '90s. I got to see how much all the coaches were paid, the costs of building maintenance, what they were spending on diesel, etc. Even though I was probably 15 at the time, I feel like I grew up a lot that day.

The information is still out there but its more likely tucked behind "read more on the web" or some other footnote to a larger story. There is nothing like opening up a paper and having all those numbers right there drawing your eyes to the sheer largeness of the numbers (Compare "roughly $3 million" with "$3,145,356.99" to see which figure gets the point across) . That type of presentation actually drew people into looking at what the city spent, how it got its money and how it all works. These days, people just get the pre-packaged spin summary from the media leaving those who are looking for something more to dig deeper to get the facts.

>Compare "roughly $3 million" with "$3,145,356.99"

 

Great point.  The average person doesn't know how many millions are in a billion. 

 

Just think for a moment what a nightmare it was to keep banking records before computers.

 

 

Enquirer getting smaller and smaller

01/20/12 at 4:50pm

Written by Letters Editor 2 Comments

 

Looking for my Enquirer this morning, I bent over to pick up what I thought was a crumpled Kleenex. Imagine my surprise when I carefully “uncrumpled” it and found that it was today’s Enquirer. As the paper gets thinner and has less news, it might be nice to have a week of daily papers delivered in a Kleenex-type box dispensing one each day. Progress!

 

Norman Bissell

 

College Hill

That's crazy, I've never heard of such a place, where's my lawyer?

 

Sorry JJ!  I didn't put two and two together!  Awesome site though

 

By the way, anyone else notice that the Enquirer scrubbed the mostly anti-Smitherman comment section clean from the "Letter: Smitherman has conflict" article?

 

http://news.cincinnati.com/comments/article/20120120/NEWS0108/301200126/Letter-Smitherman-has-conflict

 

Talk about censorship! Boycott the Enquirer!!!

 

It seems that the comments often don't last more than a few days. I have noticed a lot of other articles where this has occurred, although there is nothing in their formal policy or the FAQ's that explains why.  I would like to know what the policy is.