Problem Solved

I’m not looking for a new job, but i get journalism job postings delivered to my Google Reader and I scan them just about every day because, one, that’s what one does in my business, and two, I got laid off last summer and if I hadn’t had something else on the skillet already, that could’ve been very bad for me.

I just came across this post, which resembles listings I’ve seen about 500 times in the last few months and to me, exemplifies many things wrong with papers today, especially small and mid-sized papers, including mine, the Fightin’ Times Herald-Record.

So, the ad:

If variety is the spice of life, then we have an opportunity for you. Kansas Media One is searching for a full-time reporter who can produce quality stories for a daily community newspaper that serves Leavenworth County. For the daily Leavenworth Times newspaper, the reporter will focus primarily on Leavenworth County, but will also report on news events around the city of Leavenworth. There also will be opportunities to produce feature packages. Applicants should have reporting experience and a background in journalism, English or other related fields. Knowledge or experience with pagination layout is considered an attribute, but is not necessary.

In other words, come do everything and never be any more than mediocre at any of it!

The bias against specialization in media companies is self-defeating and then some. It’s fostered newsrooms full of haggard reporters who aren’t nearly the stars they could be because they’re spread so thin.

And it’s a huge factor in newspapers’ dwindling readership and influence because reporters are not given the chance to become experts in the communities they cover, or experts in education policy, or experts in government finance, or really great writers or videographers or whatever. What a fellow journalists calls F.U. skills. He’s talking in the context of the job market, but F.U. skills attract readers.

Overwork and unreasonable expectations = stenography. Stenography of some sorts (the sentencing of the principal child molester, the city council vote, etc.) is very important, but we need to stop doing so much of it. It’s important but it’s also about the easiest thing a reporter does, and there are people willing to do it for us for free.

Papers aren’t so bad on figuring out what new stuff to do. They’re awful at figuring out what to cut. So here’s my three-step cure to ease workloads and mental anguish while encouraging innovation and the use of important new skills like video, blogging, multimedia-ing in general.

1. It’s past time to understand 99 percent of car accidents, fires and arrests are the mundane details of life and people really don’t care, despite what page views say. In almost every instance these stories are cupcakes, eaten because they’re there, but wouldn’t be missed if they were not. Ever hear anyone crave a cupcake? This applies especially in non-competitive markets. Don’t confuse this point with me saying get rid fo cop reporters. Our cop reporter, Oliver Mackson, is one of our best reporters, and he doesn’t do the kind of stories I’m talking about. The rest of us do them endlessly.

2. In most cases, kill the early a.m. cops and traffic update shifts that’ve popped up like mushrooms in the last couple of years. These shifts are poison mushrooms and do nothing but eat a reporter’s time. There is no more useless exercise in all of reporting than an early morning round of cold calls to cop shops asking “anything goin’ on?”

We all know cops love talking to the media when they have a big bust to report. If there’s been a murder, we’re gonna know already. As for traffic tie-ups, who better to report these than people caught in them? It’s worked for radio stations for decades. Why does anyone think a reporter sitting at a desk will do a better job of reporting them? My paper already has a place for readers to upload bad potholes, so why not let them send traffic advisories, too?

There will be times actual reporters are needed on these issues, but not nearly often enough to have a dedicated shift five days a week. It’s tantamount to flushing 10 hours of reporter time that could be spent talking to sources in cafes, or editing a cool video project, or writing a really strong narrative piece, or, in my case, playing with a spreadsheet.

3. We need to spend a lot less time at meetings. I spent seven hours at a meeting in Tuxedo Park last night. Got home at 2 a.m. had to be at work at 7. Got three hours of sleep. You can imagine how productive I was today (quite, surprisingly, but my bounce-back ability doesn’t disprove the point).

I went because there were important items on the agenda and the officials in the village go out of their way to not talk to me, so sometimes I need to show up just to hear what they have to say on a particular topic. But last night I did something I’ve done way too much of in my young career - I stayed at a meeting just because I thought I was supposed to (and also out of pride, especially when 1:30 arrived and i was the only one there).

But I didn’t have to, for two important reasons.

A.) Almost every public meeting is a show trial. Real decisions get made in back rooms through back channels, no matter how much integrity sits on a particular board, council, whatever. Show me an official who says he didn’t know how he would vote when he got to a meeting and I’ll show you a liar. That’s like me saying I don’t have opinions on the stories I cover.

It’s worth going to some meetings to meet the other people who go, to get a sense of the dynamics of the governing body, to build good will, to learn, etc. But in many way there the least important place to have loafers on the ground.

So, last night, I spent seven hours being a stenographer instead of four hours reporting and three hours sleeping. And it was even more stupid because Tuxedo Park is the perfect example of letting regular folk do our grunt work.

Which leads to

B.)The world is full of citizen journalists.

The people who write for those sites are hugely important to other people in Tuxedo Park and me. I barely bother with the official Web site because these sites have much more of what I want to know. I get reports of every municipal meeting, architectural review board included, updates on community events, births and deaths and some really helpful political commentary.

In other words, I know a lot about Tuxedo Park without ever leaving my desk. I’ve gotten to know the people on the sites and lot of other people in the village, so I know many of their biases and where they’re coming from on various issues. And because I have put in my time at some of the same meetings, I know I can trust the reporting.

And when the time comes, I can step in with coverage in the paper, not as the all knowing sage, but as the disinterested party who’s made the effort to study the issues from many sides, learn the back story and provide the context of what’s really going on. The market term is adding value.

Now that I’ve gone on for some time, the point is simple and hardly original, but at my own paper and based on what I see in want ads, it’s not happening:

There are lots of smart people in the world who are interested in citizen journalism and just as capable as reporters of covering a meeting or a traffic jam. Building relationships with these people is the solution to free up reporters to do the substantive work of real value to the people who don’t have time and/or expertise to do it.