I may just be the luckiest person alive. A few weeks ago, I wrote about the closure of the Seattle P-I and how sad it made me, how it had a special place in my heart, and how depressing the journalism industry is.
Well, I work there now.
It all happened so fast. Two weeks after I wrote that blog entry, the P-I’s executive producer (yeah, that’s the new name for editor-in-chief) asked me to come in for an interview. I had written her an e-mail a few weeks before, curious if there were any opportunities for full-time or freelance. I was exceptionally surprised to actually hear back from her with positive news.
She contacted me on a Tuesday. I went in for my interview Wednesday. And they offered me the job Thursday.
Huh? What had just happened? I had been sitting around home, freelancing and whatnot, for five months. Companies were taking weeks — months — to get back to me about possible jobs. And my luck turned around just like that? In three days?
Well, I accepted the job. It is very exciting to be a part of this experiment. I feel that journalists across the country are keeping an eye on the online-only P-I, to see if it works and is economically viable. We’re the Guinea pigs. But I like that — we’re traversing uncharted ground.
My job is half online producer, half reporter (or, as my official title says, “news gatherer”). I actually haven’t started the producing side — that starts today, Easter. For reporting, I’ll mostly be covering education — both higher ed and K-12 — and a bit of e-retail (or e-tail), such as Amazon.com. I work Sunday through Thursday.
I’ll keep you guys posted as I settle in to this exciting new job. I’ve been there four days, so far, and it is quite busy.
Crazy things can happen.
I’ve been avoiding this topic on my blog, partly because I’ve been too lazy to write about it and partly because I’ve been trying to ignore it. But, obviously, the time has come. It’s time to post a tribute to the Seattle Post-Intelligencer.
This morning I spent an hour and a half reading the closure coverage in the P-I. Sipping my coffee, it was a ritual I’ve repeated hundreds and hundreds of times. Only this time it was my last. Tomorrow morning, the paper at the doorstep will be The Seattle Times. I’m not exactly happy about that — clearly I’d rather the P-I keep publishing in print.
But I must admit, I am excited to see what happens with the P-I’s transition to online-only. SeattlePI.com will be the nation’s first major experiment in whether a traditional newspaper can cut ties with dead trees and survive on the Web. Everyone in the industry is watching.
Pardon the upcoming romantic memoir.
The Seattle Post-Intelligencer was the newspaper I grew up reading. Like so many other people in so many other cities with so many other papers, the P-I was my conduit into the journalism world. I cut my teeth by reading the comics — called, in the P-I, “Coffee Break” — and Mariners coverage in the mid-’90s fooled me into actually reading the newspaper.
But before I even cared about the newspaper’s content, the Seattle P-I had cemented a place in my heart with — what else? — its big, revolving, neon globe. Way, way back in the day, my dad had an apartment in the Lower Queen Anne neighborhood. From his balcony you could watch the P-I globe spin. My dad would look out the window and tell me, quoting the globe, “It’s in the P-I.” Yes, there was so much wonder in that big ball of glowing metal.
It was the hometown newspaper. The Seattle P-I, for as long as I’ve been alive, was the underdog. The Seattle Times was the big, mean Doberman. The P-I always seemed closer to the hearts of Seattleites; it had a better finger on the city’s pulse.
I’ve often wondered if my early experiences with the P-I steered my future toward journalism. The allure of newspapers brought me into the Daily Evergreen newsroom at WSU, and though it took a semester for me to find my reporting legs, I ended up falling for journalism. After a year of working for the Evergreen, taking on more and more important stories, I applied for an internship at the Seattle P-I. And got it.
There I was, just a year into my journalism career, working at the newspaper I grew up admiring. The internship did not disappoint — I took what I learned there, and my stronger passion for journalism, back to the Evergreen and ended up as editor-in-chief. That, in turn, landed me my job at The Spokesman-Review in Spokane. And I credit the P-I for all of it.
That’s why today’s closure of the P-I — at least as Seattle has known it for 146 years — hit me hard. It’s not like it was a surprise, since Hearst put the paper up for sale two months ago. And it wasn’t the first major newspaper to die this year, after the closure of the Rocky Mountain News in Denver last month. But the fact that it happened to the P-I — my newspaper — gives it a more personal sting.
I am sad for the 100-plus journalists who lost their jobs today. I know many of them, and many of them were mentors who helped me become a better journalist. I am more sad for Seattle, which has now lost its heart, and a voice. And I am devastated for the state of American journalism, both for its dwindling effectiveness and its incapacity to adapt to the digital age.
For most Americans, the demise of the P-I is yet another drop in the bucket. Many people are saddened at the loss of another important institution. Many people are disaffected, happy to see the Big Bad Media fall apart and excited for the future of online news.
I feel discouraged, only able to watch from the sidelines and so far unable to get another job in journalism. A significant piece of my life dissolved today. However close to home this downward journalism spiral has been, the P-I’s closure brings it closer.
But, as I mentioned above, I am still excited to see what happens. I’m rooting for the success of the online-only P-I. It would give struggling journalists like me, and so many people I know and care about, some much-needed hope in these dismal times.
So, rest in peace, P-I print. And welcome to the new world, P-I online. Godspeed.
ARLINGTON, Va. — My feet really started to hurt Wednesday. It’s amazing how all this walking and standing around — regardless of the shoes you’re wearing — screws up your feet. But I toughed it out.
My agenda for Wednesday was as follows:
- National Archives
- Newseum
- National Portrait Gallery (with Lisa)
I got to the Archives a day early — on Thursday they put the Emancipation Proclamation on display in honor of Abraham Lincoln’s 200th birthday. But all the regular good stuff was there: the Declaration of Independence, the Constitution and the Bill of Rights.
Newseum was the only museum for which I paid an admittance fee. And not a small one — $20. But it really was a great museum. There were tons of interesting things for a journalism nerd for me, and plenty of stuff for the average person. Walking through there, it seemed to me that part of Newseum’s mission is to instill back into people the value of the First Amendment and the press, something people are starting to forget.
Also what impressed me was that many of their exhibits were extremely up-to-date — the convergence exhibit, for example, talked about the coverage of Flight 1549 (the one that crashed into the Hudson a few weeks ago). Any museum, I suppose, has to keep rotating its collection to make it fresh, but Newseum really needs to keep on top of things, and it seems to do that very well.
Newseum also had some cool artifacts, like a big chunk of the Berlin Wall and part of the antenna from the North Tower of the World Trade Center.
The main reason Lisa and I went to the National Portrait Gallery was to see the original Obama Hope collage, which was recently installed. It was way cooler than you’d even think! I can’t even describe it.
Anyway, my pictures.
Hats off, once again, to The New York Times for its interactive graphic on Thursday’s plane crash in the Hudson River. It’s exactly what I wanted to see, and it was executed beautifully. And they turned it around so quickly!
The other day I wrote about how I felt ambivalent about The Spokesman-Review’s finally-launched new website. Well, today I am comfortable saying that I am impressed.
The Spokesman’s effort in reporting and presenting this week’s snow storm is commendable. With 25 percent fewer newsroom employees than last year, the Spokesman folks regularly updated thier written stories, took 40-plus photos, shot a video (that was Colin), recorded audio interviews and posted PDFs.
And all of it is easily accessible on the Spokesman’s new website.
That’s a link to Thursday’s story. Today’s story doesn’t have video but does have PDFs. Doesn’t look like too many people have caught on yet to the ability to comment — though a few have on SportsLink. The majority seemed hesitant about having to get used to a new website, and gone is the old backdoor through which people could read an entire news story, without being a subscriber, if they were linked to it from SportsLink.
Give ‘em time. For big stories like the snow storm, the new multimedia-friendly web design is just great.
Looks like The Spokesman-Review’s new website is finally up and running. I questioned whether this day would ever actually come.
Unfortunately, when I opened up SpokesmanReview.com and saw the refer to Spokesman.com this morning, I became instantly agitated. Why, I’m not sure. I feel a little left out, yes, but more ambivalent. I think because I waited so long for this while I was there — my excitement waning each time the launch was postponed. Now I’m gone, along with most of the other journalists doing video, and there’s not really anything newfangled to post on this newfangled site.
Nice to see, however, that the Spokesman’s flag is at the top, instead of plain text. And it looks like most of the advertising spaces are filled. Also, I’m glad Colin Mulvany has been able to put together a few videos.
But welcome to the 21st century, Spokesman-Review. Your website now looks like every other newspaper’s, except for the cutting-edge navigation system conveniently located near the top of the page.
I know a lot of hard work went into the new website, and I know the people who did it. And I thoroughly commend them; it was a frustrating ride for even me, way on the outside of the process. The new website looks and functions great — it really does — but it’s not really anything new. Which, ya know, at this point is just fine.
Now, Spokesmen and Spokeswomen, take this new site and run with it. Seize the opportunity and make some great journalism. There may not be much time left to do so. (Boy, that sounded cynical.)
Filed under: Adventure, Challenge, Events, Job Search, Journalism, News Industry, Sea Change
Well hey everybody. It’s been a month since I last posted. Part of that is because I’ve been busy at work, and part of it is because I’ve been lazy at blogging. Really lazy.
Obviously my big news is that I am on a list of 25-27 employees expected to be laid off by Oct. 24. But I’ll get to that in a bit.
The past month started out with some real promise. Steve Smith, former editor-in-chief of The Spokesman-Review, asked Brian Immel and me to kick off a big project. We were charged with taking the popular SportsLink blog and spinning it off into its own website, with the goal of making it profitable. That was going to be our job — I’d no longer be in the sports department.
The project got going slowly because Brian was busy working on the Spokesman’s yet-to-be-launched new website. So I continued my sports multimedia producer job. This included another new project, The Mike & Greg Show — a weekly video with two high-school sports reporters in which they make their game picks for the upcoming weekend. So far, we’ve done four episodes (1, 2, 3, 4).
Last Monday, Brian and I finally started having some good conversations on what we wanted to do with SportsLink. We wanted text-message updates, better play for videos, customizable home pages — we were even toying with the idea of making it a social networking site. (I know, it’s a dreaded term. There’s just no better one.)
Then came Wednesday, and everything came to a halt.
Layoffs. For me, out of the blue. I expected to get at least a little warning that layoffs might be coming. It was quite sudden — a morning e-mail announcing an all-staff meeting, rumors throughout the day, then the gauntlet came down.
Twenty-one union-covered newsroom employees were on the layoff list. Plus four to six managers. All said, 25 to 27 people gone from the newsroom. That’s about one-quarter of the staff. It’s devastating. Amid the turmoil, Steve also resigned. He had for months told people there wouldn’t be more layoffs under his watch. I’m glad he followed through.
The layoffs, as governed by an agreement between management and the union, must be done by inverse seniority. The majority of us on the list are 20-something journalists from all departments. Three of us are from sports. Wednesday night, a group of us gathered at Lisa’s and my place for some commiseration.
The next day, assistant managing editor Carla Savalli announced her resignation. And the exodus had started.
People have two weeks to submit voluntary resignations, which would help save the jobs of some of the people on the layoff list. I’m not holding out too much hope. And that gets me to, well, me.
When the news was announced, I didn’t know how to take it. I knew my name would be on that list; I’m the second-least-senior member of the sports staff. After Steve’s meeting, I immediately ducked out of the newsroom and headed home.
But now it’s sinking in. For the past few days, I’ve been working on getting my stuff together to send out job applications. Lisa graciously redesigned my résumé for me, I uploaded a few of my videos to Vimeo and I gathered together a bunch of print clips for my portfolio.
Really, I’ve started to see this as an exciting challenge, a chance to go somewhere else without feeling bad about leaving the Spokesman. I’m looking not just near my hometown Seattle, but elsewhere in the country. I’m not limiting myself to just print or just video, I’m broadening my scope. And, yes, that means broadening my scope past newspapers — though that’s where the majority of my searching has taken me.
I will soon make a new page for this website to function as a sort of video portfolio. And I may start putting up some print clips. But this means I may hide the blog for a little bit, to keep it out of the eyes of potential employers. I don’t think there’s anything that could hurt my chances here, but it’s not worth the risk. If I hide the blog, I’ll be sure to tell you all how to access it.
In the meantime, thanks to those of you who have called or texted me to check in. I’ll keep everyone posted.
Seriously, this is what the newspaper industry needs to see. Lisa breaks down the content workflow of print journalism beautifully in on her blog. It’s simple, and it’s how newspapers, in this tumultuous time, need to start thinking.
UPDATED 2:30 p.m.
My post providing a link to the Gang of Eight report (PDF) and my overview of its main points has not caught on in the journalism blog network (yet?), but there has been some constructive response. Our team presented the plan Monday to the rest of the Spokesman-Review newsroom (or those who attended) and answered the expected onslaught of questions — though they were less hostile and more considerate than we expected.
On the S-R’s public “Daily Briefing” blog is a post outlining the discussion and peoples questions and concerns, along with our team’s responses. As Thuy-Dzuong Nguyen wrote:
“We don’t pretend that this is the answer,” said producer Andrew Zahler, one of the eight, emphasizing that this is only a starting point for idea-storming.
There’s been both support and criticism from inside and outside the newsroom during the brainstorm process, in which eight younger staffers were asked to conduct a massive efficiency study in 11 days and within a few open guidelines.
Here it is, the moment you’ve all been waiting for.
As I mentioned here, I was one of eight young journalists at The Spokesman-Review, in Spokane, asked to conduct a study to find new ways to structure the newsroom to increase efficiency and productivity. We had 11 days to turn in our report, and we met eight times for as long as six hours a day to come up with a plan.
Our editor-in-chief, Steve Smith, has posted our report on his S-R blog, “News is a Conversation.” Check out the link to his post.
I had asked the group to rethink the newsroom to take into account the realities of our downsized world. I thought a group of young journalists with fewer ties to the past and with their careers ahead of them might generate some ideas that could help drive change discussions in our newsroom.
But it’s important to keep in mind this most important point: This report is NOT a plan. It is a series of ideas and possibilities suggested by one group of journalists after 10 days of intensive study. Because they were asked to look at structure and process, there is not much discussion about content. Obviously, we must deal with content as we move our conversations forward.
Another member of our team, Andrew Zahler, wrote a similar post to mine on his blog.
Here is the LINK TO OUR REPORT. It’s a PDF file.
Here are the main changes:
- Restructure the newsroom workflow for most content, shifting deadlines for non-daily stories to noon. Except for breaking news (including City Council meetings, for example) and sports, the newsroom essentially functions like it would if the S-R were an afternoon newspaper. Breaking news and sports would continue to operate on the current deadline structure. This deadline shift would ensure content can be published to the website throughout the afternoon and would encourage better coordination for multimedia and online production. It would also reduce editing bottlenecks at the end of editors’ shifts, and would require more copy editors during the day and reduce the number at night.
- Create a universal reporters pool by combining the existing City, Business, Features, Voices (community extras) and 7 (weekly alt tab) desks. This excludes Sports. This allows stories produced by any writer to be used in any section of the newspaper, instead of having reporters assigned to specific sections. It would also increase staff content in the Voices and eliminate duplication of stories across such sections. The desk is led by a local editor and eight assistant local editors. The assistants are in charge of a reporting topic but not of a specific section of the newspaper, and are assigned as follows: breaking news, watchdog, life, culture, money, Washington hyperlocal, Idaho hyperlocal and wire. The sports department remains independent, though sports features can be shared among sections if deemed worthy.
- Create a hybrid universal copy desk, combining the day (features) and night desks. Because of the deadline shift, more copy editors would be required during the day than the night, and shifts would be staggered. Copy editors would read stories before they are published online, upholding the integrity of website. The idea is that the S-R is no longer just a newspaper, but a news organization that produces content to be published on multiple platforms: online, print and radio. The sports copy desk, due to its specialization, is not included in the universal copy desk.
- Combining the multimedia and photo departments into a Visuals Department.
- Flattening the newsroom hierarchy, as depicted in the organizational chart.
There are further (and more radical) ideas in the “additional suggestions” section of the report, and a few more in the “minority suggestions” section.
Please feel free to comment with your questions and I will try to answer them as best I can. Please keep in mind I am one of eight committee members and cannot speak for the entire group.
And as Steve said in his blog:
Those who merely want to insult the study group by challenging their youth, calling into question their professionalism or calling them names are asked to take their comments elsewhere.
