I am amazed that the WashPost article has received no comment. So let me be the first to say I am troubled but not surprised by what Gannett is doing. [In the interests of disclosure, I formerly worked as a copy editor and reporter for the Tennessean, a Gannett newspaper.]

Actually, troubled is putting it mildly. What Gannett is doing is paying mobile journalists ("mojos," they call them) to create "content" that will draw eyeballs to web sites, eyeballs that will translate into greater ad revenues for Gannett. Gannett also will use unpaid volunteers to do the true work of journalism - reviewing records, analyzing information, making sense of the data, and putting the fruits of that labor together in a coherent fashion that answers a question that concerns the community, to wit, in this case, why the cost of hooking up to water and sewer lines seems high. Does anyone besides me see something wrong with this picture?

From a business standpoint, it takes time and costs money for an actual employee (reporter) to wade through records, talk to experts, and analyze information. Furthermore, the investment is risky - it may or may not result in a story an editor deems worthy of publishing. Better to have a story in the hand, etc., than expend time and effort without the assurance a story will pan out. Better to shift that risk to unpaid volunteers, albeit experts.

So the mojos go out and cover the signing of the chamber of commerce's fundraising beefcake calendar, possibly ignoring a more important story in the parking lot - are there really threatening vagrants afoot? Who are they, where do they come from, are they new in town, why are they threatening. Also, how about those six middle aged ladies working out? Are more people usually there? Fewer? What's up with that - they're spending time and money working out, and exercise and health has to be more important to readers than some calendar with so-called hunks? And why does the chamber have to raise money? I could go on, and maybe these questions already have been answered, but I wonder.

Besides questions of news judgment and the goal of journalism, the Post article raises others equally troubling.

- The mojos' work is posted to the web without editing. I know editors can be a pain in the tush, but what about that second set of eyes to make sure the story makes sense and doesn't defame anyone?

- The newspaper offers readers an online message board that seems to have no editorial controls. What about false information, defamation, invasion of people's privacy? I guess the message board adds the eyeballs that determine ad rates, but aren't news organizations supposed to be concerned about credibility as well as the bottom line?

- The newspaper is sending reporters out with ad salespeople to find "sponsors" for a big story. WHAT??? I thought THE NEWSPAPER was the "sponsor." I can picture Woodward and Bernstein going out with a couple of ad guys so that the Post could bring people "Duff Beer's 'All the President's Men.' " I guess it had to happen, since every sporting event and playing field these days seems to have a corporate sponsor. I guess I'm just not in tune with the times. And I'm ignoring all the pesky questions about the extent to which the sponsor has a say in the story, potential liability if the story is defamatory, etc.

- Of course the most telling sentences in the whole Post story were these: "(News-Press executive editor) Marymont must eliminate three staff positions by the end of the year to meet the budget set by Gannett headquarters in McLean. The paper has offered buyouts to older staffers." They're adding mojos, the story said 14 full and part time, but cutting staff? It sounded as though there would be a net increase in staff - with the mojos, but whom do they report to? Are they part of the news staff, advertising, online media? Are they really reporters or some kind of hybrid content generator? Is their mission really journalism?

I'd really like to know.

Posted by: Kathy Carlson at December 9, 2006 11:26 AM

Name:


Email Address:


URL:

Remember personal info?
YesNo
Comments:

Email this entry to:


Your email address:


Message (optional):