The S-T’s Austin City Limits
by Steve-OOf all the slashing and burning going on at the Star-Telegram of late, perhaps the unkindest cuts have been sustained by the paper’s Austin bureau. Jake Dyer and Jay Root hit the trail after the last round of staff reductions. In this round of buyouts, John Moritz hit the exit. For Fort Worth readers who get most of their news about state government from the Star-Telegram, these cuts are indeed bad news. As Moritz himself put it in his touching farewell note to his colleagues, “Representative democracy cannot survive without the watchful eye of a free and aggressive press. … I pray that those who practice our profession never lose sight of that.”
In an effort to stop the bleeding, long-time Startlegramer Dave Montgomery is coming back from McClatchy’s D.C. bureau to take over the S-T’s Austin bureau. Although a veteran reporter like Montgomery who has been in the business since the mid-1960s will be an asset for the S-T in Austin, one can’t help but wonder where the next generation of experienced reporters is going to come from. Several current and former Startlegramers were particularly upset about Dyer’s departure. With the profession hemorrhaging reporters in their prime like Dyer, Root and Moritz, who will take over when guys like Montgomery hang’em up? Tomorrow’s newspapers — if they even exist — could well be even worse than today’s disappointing product.
Tags: star-telegram
7 Comments, Comments or Pings
TexasBurgerStops.com
While it is an absolute shame this is happening, it is the cold, hard fact of inevitability.
We have been progressing rapidly info the digital age and it is only a matter of time before most newspapers fade like the analog signal from our TV sets in Feb 2009. The big ones and the ones that innovate will survive as well as those in small towns serving as the only local source of news.
Newspaper’s have to compete with the world’s appeal to know what happened instantly. Society, today, doesn’t want to wait a day to see what happened. At least not in the fast-paced metropolitan areas.
Newspaper conglomerates have to retool their way of thinking and doing business. Today’s youth don’t want to dig through an ‘analog’ paper if they can get the digital version on their .
Newspapers have to compete with Bloggers, Television, Podcasts, Satellite Radio and online communities and forums where people get the ‘news’ they are interested in.
Newspapers will survive, but they need to trim down the ‘analog’ version and ramp up their efforts in the electronic medium. It’s happened before. Look at AM radio. With all of the newer, better, faster ways of getting information out, AM radio still has a place in society and a loyal following with the talk-radio show and sports stations.
Sep 17th, 2008
John Peter Smith
“Representative democracy cannot survive without the watchful eye of a free and aggressive press.” That quote is a prime example of the self-absorbed mindset that got the newspaper industry into its current situation.
For decades they were the only game in town and they enjoyed their monopoly position along with the power and profits that came with it. While the news landscape has undergone a huge change, newspapers continue to chant their same old mantra: “You need us, you need us, really, you need us.” I’m not real sure if they are trying convince their customers or themselves.
Honestly, sometimes they try to make buying a newspaper sound like it is a civic obligation like voting or jury duty. Sorry, it’s just not.
Here’s what every newspaper employee should try to tell me every single workday: Why should I pay them for content and services I can get for free? Pick any section of the paper and the question is the same:
–Classifieds: Craigslist, Ebay, etc.
–Shopping: Amazon, Itunes, Ebay, etc.
–News: A million sites on the internet.
–Opinion: A trillion blogs (and growing).
Now I can hear the argument. But only the local paper can provide the in-depth local issue coverage you need. Puhlease. The Startlegram abandoned that type of reporting 3 or 4 owners ago. Most of the paper is nothing but warmed over wire service reports and rehashed news releases that I can get quicker online.
While I sympathize with anyone that loses their job I have no sympathy for newspapers that are going broke. They have failed to answer the basic question every business must answer: What product/service do you provide that people will pay you for? It’s not the consumer’s fault they can’t seem to find an answer to that question.
Sep 17th, 2008
Greg
JPS, the only place I’ll take minor issue is when it comes to the actual “news.” Sure, there are a million sites on the Internet for news, but who gathers it and, more importantly, who validates it? There’s a need for actual journalists and editors to maintain news quality, but I agreee, it doesn’t need to be newspaper companies doing it.
I personally think the S-T would do better to focus on local issues, but their problem is they won’t do any negative stories so there’s nothing interesting. If they really wanted to sell some papers they would become critical of local happenings and make people want to buy the paper for some really juicy information. That’s how the FW Weekly stays in business; they get boots on the ground and go rake some muck.
Sep 17th, 2008
David AKA Rico
No negative stories!??!? I think the S-T has made it clear that they are pretty sure crime is bad, and so is disease… and celebrities lead complicated lives… and the Cowboys may not be altogether wonderful but probably are. How is THAT for hard-hitting “news”?!
Seriously, the S-T does not deserve to survive if it cannot find its niche. As JPS pointed out, most of the functions the paper serves are performed better elsewhere. The exception is local coverage. The FW Weekly does an admirable job of keeping us informed of local happenings, but it is a weekly publication. It would be nice if our daily paper put at least as much effort into it.
Sep 17th, 2008
Fescue
I want to care about the Star Telegram’s imminent demise but I find it hard to. Don’t get me wrong, we need a good local paper and, if we had one, I might actually subscribe but the Startlegram is all but useless to me. As one friend of mine put it, the Startlegram is USA Today for white trash.
Sep 17th, 2008
John C.
I think Greg is spot-on here … “There’s a need for actual journalists and editors to maintain news quality, but I agree, it doesn’t need to be newspaper companies doing it.”
I think we all agree that it doesn’t NEED to be newspapers doing this, but it CAN and SHOULD be, regardless of who else is putting out news and opinion. When radio was introduced to the masses, offering instantaneous coverage of breaking news, newspapers didn’t fold because they still offered something that radio didn’t: depth. When TV came along, the newspaper industry didn’t fold, because you couldn’t drag a TV on the train with you or in your car or onto your front porch (very easily, at least). The internet has ushered in a whole new era of news gathering and reporting, but it doesn’t mean that newspapers have to fold now, either …
The simple fact is, most people want to get their quick-hitting, late-breaking news online. But no one wants to sit in front of their computer monitors with a cup of coffee on a Sunday morning and scroll through an in-depth piece on local poverty or corruption or triumph that spans eight screens. Online has its place, and so does print. People have figured out what online does well — speed, video, audio, etc. Now figure out what print does well, and do it. Give me some in-depth, local reporting that no else can give me … Delve into the issues that aren’t being covered by some blogger who offers up nothing more than a quick opinion and a bunch of links to other peoples’ work … Go to the local meetings I can’t attend, interview the people I don’t have access to, ask the questions I can’t, and put it into context for me.
Sep 18th, 2008
Richard Marmo
John C., you are absolutely correct concerning where the Startlegram needs to go in order to survive and even thrive. There are more than enough local issues that people want to know about to keep them doing well. The Barnett Shale in general and gas pipelines in particular could be almost a full time job for at least three or four reporters. Then there’s local political corruption, conflict of interest on the City Council and on and on. Let’s not forget issues of intense interest that are specific to the various neighborhood associations. But don’t just skim the surface and move on to a new subject. Go in-depth. Dig for the information that people want and don’t know how to find on their own.
Let’s also go back to the type of articles they rarely do anymore…human interest pieces on those of us who have relatively unusual ways to make a living. Not only does it make for interesting reading and lets readers know there are those who actually provide services they’re looking for but don’t know where to find, it also helps us find new business which definitely helps the economy.
It also wouldn’t hurt if the Startlegram would return to being truly impartial in regards to issues in general and the political arena in particular.
Is there a place for a good old fashioned, conventional paper newspaper in the digital age? Absolutely! Will the Star-Telegram be one of those? Only if they can see the handwriting on the wall and make the changes they need to.
Sep 18th, 2008
Reply to “The S-T’s Austin City Limits”