January 7, 2009 10:46 AM
Response to media critic Jason Salzman
Rocky Mountain News contributor Jason Salzman has posted on his own blog a media criticism column we rejected, saying "I didn't think the column I submitted Thursday was so bad that it would be rejected."
His claim is surprising. As Jason knows, we regularly discuss his topics early in the week and have told him on many occasions that they're not developed enough or that he's missing an angle or that they don't fit the job description of what he's supposed to do. And we have vetoed proposed items several times. That's part of editing a newspaper. I have killed one of my own columns after concerns were raised by another editor. I took them into account and decided he was right. I have killed the columns of other Rocky writers for a variety of reasons. And we, of course, hold columns if we think they need more work before publication.
Last Wednesday, Jason was told by the editor who handles his page that his proposed column was not acceptable and he should try a different topic. Jason kept pushing and the issue came to my desk because the editorial page editor was on vacation. I told Jason in no uncertain terms that I supported the thinking of his editor.
Jason then revised the column and submitted it to me, with the following note: "Hi -
I've written another draft of my column below. It's toned down, focusing on what has not been reported. I emphasized that a decision to close the Rocky has not been made. I think readers deserve to know what the Justice Department could conceivably do, if a premature decision to close the Rocky is made. I think this is a reasonable topic the media column. Jason"
I responded:
Jason,
Just to be clear: I don't think this is a reasonable topic. And even if it were, I don't think you've done a good enough job with it to merit publication. You haven't done enough homework nor are you well informed enough. But that's not the key thing. Go back and look at your job description. This is just you, with little information or research, giving us your point of view. That's an opinion column. We can get plenty of those. This isn't what we're paying you for. We're actually looking for analysis of media coverage. That would involve looking at how news organizations cover events and providing some perspective on it. This doesn't do that.
Either try again on a new topic or take the week off.
J
Jason then replied:
Hi John -
One of the ways I am allowed to critique news coverage is to point out omissions and add new facts that haven't been reported. I've written here about a major omission on a huge story, no?
J
And I responded again:
Actually, no.
Your basic premise of a major omission is false. From the first day both papers have made it clear that the justice dept has a role in the drama that is playing out.
However you have done so little homework that you don't test one of the basic assertions Scripps made on the day of the announcement. That was that they could have been there to close the paper that day. If you had spoken to lawyers who had actually worked with the justice dept on such matters you would have learned that the owner could have acted first and notified later. You would also have learned that an owner has many more options than the black and white close or keep running. I could go on and on about the problems with the column but don't think that would be worthwhile.
Jason, in my view you have struggled to understand your role from the get go. But in this case you're way off base. I will not run this column. It does not meet our journalistic standards.
John
Jason's premise is outlined in the second paragraph of the column he submitted:
"...in the case of the Rocky Mountain News, which is up for sale and facing possible closure, we've seen no (emphasis added) reporting about what the government could do to help the daily."
In the Rocky the day after the announcement, a separate story covered that very issue, outlining the role of the Justice Department and the Newspaper Preservation Act. The headline was "1970 newspaper preservation law has shown mixed results, 16 of 27 joint biz agreements have failed over the years."
Here's a link to that story.
The Post published its own story on the same topic on the same day, with the headline: "Breaking up can be hard to do for papers."
Here's a key section of that story.
Should Scripps fail to find a buyer that MediaNews can live with, the two companies will most likely negotiate an exit strategy with The Post as the surviving newspaper, experts predict.
In past years that might have raised the ire of the Justice Department, but (Media competition expert Stephen) Lacy said the government will probably stay on the sidelines given the tough economic climate. "The reality is that the Rocky is losing money. You can't force somebody to keep a paper open and lose money," Lacy said.
Jason in his proposed column quotes the same expert and acknowledges that he's correct, but concludes:
"Still, readers deserve to know what can be done if a premature decision to close the paper is made."
The concept of a "premature decision" is pure opinion. It has nothing to do with the actual coverage by the local media. I don't believe that readers of either paper are confused about the matter. The experts say an owner can close a paper. What can be done afterward is cold comfort.
Jason has the right to post his writing in any way he sees fit. But the Rocky has journalistic standards and didn't believe his column on this topic met them. We never give up the right to edit any submission to the Rocky or any article by a staff member.
January 7, 2009
12:02 PM
SASQUATCH writes:
Jason's total and complete failure to understand how free market capitsalism works--and the role that its owner/shareholders and consumers play--is beyond belief. I have seen irrational and dysfunctional positions before, but Jason takes the cake.
John, you should have unloaded this second-rate "journalist" long ago. You are late, but you get my unambiguous hat-tip.
January 7, 2009
12:30 PM
HopiMedicineMan writes:
The sale and possible closure of this newspaper is a major event for those of us who have subscribed for so many years. I’d like to see the story waged in the paper. It’s history. It’s newsworthy.
And it’s altogether tragic. Families could split up. Homes could be lost. This is a very rare skill these folks have. It’s not in great demand, especially that of writing a column. I’d surely re-think that whole area.
Littwin could cover a Boulder beat, bring in fresh info. Compete for Camera advertising dollars. Set Griego loose on Adams County and Commerce City. One of the very best news writers in the US is Jean Torkelson and you have her writing religion, while community newspapers have a free hand in the surrounding counties where the Rocky’s traditional readership lives.
I would bring the business beat forward in the paper. Business used to be as important as government. Now business is more important than government given it is the only entity that can bring a recovery. Compete for dollars going to the Denver Business Journal. Take them all on. Pay for these words. Keep content tight and concise and precise. The style gravitated toward the Post. You need a traffic cop.
I skim news and editorials and that’s it usually. But readers feel attached here and our voice is going down with the Rocky. I cannot say enough about Vince Carroll. You’ve lost conservative writers over the years only to come up with a gem. I will not relish seeing him bagging groceries at the KS on Corona.
The only other papers I read regularly are the WSJ and IBD. I suppose I’ll adapt to the Post, get a tattoo and a nose ring.
I was angry at the announcement. I admit it. I probably jumped on some of these writers and you John, more than I should have. And for that I apologize (not that anyone is actually reading down to hear by now).
The product is basically exceptional, a boutique of flavors and colors on my kitchen table with only the exceptional gut knot that does not characterize the entire paper.
We had little time to put together a group to purchase the paper. I’m sure a consortium of some of your major advertisers could buy.
I can’t help but think this paper could be saved with the right moves.
January 7, 2009
12:33 PM
gs writes:
I much prefer the columns that the guy that hurt his back wrote. He had a liberal bent and his articles made a lot of sense. Perhaps he (I think his name was Dobbs) could come back. The issue that caused him to leave I think was that he had a radio talk show. The talk show is now off the air so he could come back.
January 7, 2009
1:24 PM
HopiMedicineMan writes:
My understanding is Salzman and Kopel are media critics. The biggest media story of a century is Denver losing the Rocky Mountain News. I should think his column would be a high priority. I disagree with Salzman on most things. However, I think he’s on to something. The JOA angle needs to be fully explored. Couple the rejection of the column—doesn’t fit job description??--with the rush to closure and the lack of rebooting the company months ago, something doesn’t seem right.
January 7, 2009
3:06 PM
edward allen writes:
I wonder if Temple realizes how ridiculous he looks on this issue, especially after engaging in a "public right to know" battle over an incredibly silly decision to tweet a funeral. It's okay for the RMN to tweet a funeral, but when it comes to talking about the employer who signs the paycheck of RMN employees (Temple included), it is an entirely different matter. I don't carry any water for the columnist here, but he was hired to be a media columnist and it strikes me the local newspaper should be part of his media beat. Such lines being drawn in this case were not drawn in the past. I also seem to recall a RMN business columnist opining on the future of the RMN a few months ago. It is exactly these sort of erratic editing decisions that has led the RMN into the travails it now faces.
January 7, 2009
3:59 PM
labutard writes:
Salzman wrote an interesting column that I enjoyed reading. Maybe if you'd stop being such a baby, you could run some of these provocative pieces, sell a few more papers and then not be in the situation you are in. Instead, you get threatened that you can't control the messenger and the message, then you rear up like you usual bully self. Whatever. Your time of being able to bulloze people is about to end. Soon, you will be John Who Nobody. And we will laugh in your face because nobody will want to give YOU a platform for your drivel.
January 7, 2009
5:15 PM
Gunny Bob writes:
As I have opined elsewhere on the Web, it is sad to see a paper's people attack each other publicly under the stress of the paper going under. First Carroll and Campos went at it, now this.
Not good.
January 7, 2009
5:59 PM
peterpi writes:
Temple rejects Salzman's proposed column because it's an opinion piece? Heck, that's what I always thought Salzman's and Kopel's pieces were -- opinion pieces about local media.
They're certainly not "just the facts, ma'am" newspaper reporters reporting on local media. They offer opinions as to the job the media are doing. Kopel writes one week that the TV stations didn't cover one side of a story. Salzman writes another week that some talk-show host deliberately misrepresented a story. They may both offer facts to back up their case. But it's still essentially opinion.
GunnyBob, I disagree. I've seen columnists critique each other before. Carroll and Campos are going to disagree on a lot of things. But, in this case, you may be closer to the truth. Yes, it's an overused Shakespeare quote, but methinks Temple protests too much. Could it be because Salzman hits too close to the truth? Why IS Scripps only putting the RMN on the market for one month -- and during the holiday season, at that?
If an eligible buyer came along, Scripps would recoup money and have a losing paper off its hands. What is Scripps really up to or afraid of?
January 7, 2009
6:34 PM
Freda Borden writes:
Hopi I think you are being a little melodramatic, I dont usually read the comments at the bottom so I'm not familiar with you but it SOUNDS like you have a vested interest in the paper surviving, leading me to believe you have some kind of link to the paper's survival.
The RMN used to be a great newspaper now it is just another mediocre liberal rag, and it won't be missed. The book format will be missed it's really the only reason I kept reading the RMN over the Post. But given that the DNA was printing the book style they could easily do the same with the DP.
I avoid reading the DP when possible as well, I started getting my local news from tv news websites, they don't go very in depth but at least I'm not getting pure bias.
Let the RMN go it's time, it's been too long and the thing is far too ruined by the current staff.
January 7, 2009
10:16 PM
Iceman7 writes:
John,
You acted in a very reasonable manner by not allowing Saltzman to once again publish rubbish. His columns are always lazed with personal opinions rather than a minimal degree of facts.
If Saltzman is on the RMN payroll then you have every right to demand accurate reporting even if the column is on the editorial page.
Now if you could please eliminate Garrison Keillor disgusting columns, my family would once again enjoy reading the RMN. All we ask of our nespapers is that they provide factual information that stimulates thought and debate.
Thank you
January 7, 2009
10:27 PM
Iceman7 writes:
Gunny,
"As I have opined elsewhere on the Web, it is sad to see a paper's people attack each other publicly under the stress of the paper going under. First Carroll and Campos went at it, now this.
Not good."
Give me a break!
There is an internal struggle going on the RMN that has been needed for a long time. What is SAD about the editors taking exception with shoty reporting. Yes, in an open forum. It is simply bringing the newspaper to a higher standard.
I say Kudos to Temple and Carroll...
January 7, 2009
11:45 PM
prima facie writes:
Careful, wise and all-knowing Mr. Temple, patting yourself on the back all the time must be tough on your shoulder.
January 8, 2009
8:11 AM
Gunny Bob writes:
Ice:
Turning a once staid and respected newspaper into an online soap opera as the paper self destructs is a good thing? Publicly airing a company's personal dirty undies is a good thing?
Leaders know that the best way to handle the interpersonal dynamics of an organization when it comes to the good and the bad is public praise and private reprimand. Sadly, Temple, while correct in his reprimanding of Salzman, took that reprimand public as his subordinate did. Temple could have chosen the high road, but selected the gutter of virtual voyeurism instead.
This is now a trend, following the farcical snit between Carroll and Campos. These pedantic food fights are embarrassing evidence that the Rocky is bottom bound, which is a shame but no one's fault but the paper's leadership.
January 8, 2009
4:39 PM
mytwosense writes:
If the Rocky doesn't pay Salzman to write opinion columns, why do they put his columns in the Opinion section? He's done a fine job analyzing media coverage, but that sort of analysis does require critiquing, which is an offset of opinion-writing.
Still, I give the RMN high props for covering this internal skirmish. Will really, really miss this unusual paper if they do indeed go away. Any coverage of their current situation can only give readers more insight that as regular visitors to the RMN, we'd like to have.
January 10, 2009
12:31 PM
Pat S. writes:
A video response...
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PtE9olkWTSI
January 11, 2009
12:54 PM
Martin Berliner writes:
John Temple's rationale is flawed and his motives are at best suspect. His objection appears to be to the topic, although as an afterthought there is criticism of the quality of Saltzman's research. Temple (read Scripps, for which he is clearly carrying water)doesn't want inquiry into its actions or motives. Who could reasonably believe, with the Christmas season intervening, that a deal to purchase the RMN could be put together in a month? Perhaps we can expect to see the shuttering of the RMN on Friday, January 16, which is, I believe, the deadline set for the "fish or cut bait" ultimatum given by Scripps in mid-December. Sad for Denver and for the newspaper industry in general. But we can be assured that Temple will have a soft landing. Don't bite the hand that feeds you.
January 16, 2009
3:42 PM
John writes:
Wow. This is interesting stuff. I would love to be a columnist for a newspaper. Can I substitute for Jason sometime? That would be a great story: "Major newspaper editor gives unknown poster a chance to write his own column in the paper". Sounds like a Rocky movie.
January 19, 2009
9:59 AM
Felix Yunger writes:
This is infuriating. John Temple, once again, sounds like a spoiled child arguing a ridiculous point. I know John, and this the exact same way he operates his newsroom. If he doesn't like a story - whether it's too liberal or makes him look bad - he kills it. What's this about shallow reporting? Has John read his paper lately? Every story is short, giving no room for thorough reporting and only enough time to plant seeds for an average story. It truly sounds like Jason hit a nerve that John doesn't want discussed. I hope Scripps ditches him when the Rocky closes.
January 21, 2009
10:36 AM
William Eastwood writes:
Has Jacob Salzman stopped beating his wife? Mr. Salzman's push-pull defense of ProPublica's push-pull comments on hydraulic fracturing is as much willfull ignorance of science and engineering as the Bush admeinistration is accussed of being. ProPublica says that the service companies refuse to release the composition of the compounds used. Have they been asked? Have consulting engineers been asked? Have articles and ads in the Oil and Gas Journal been examined? Have professors of petroleum engineering at the universities been asked? Obviously not, otherswise the answers might be ones that ProPublica and Mr. Salzman do not want. After all, artificial fracturing of low permeability zones has been used at least since the 1930s and Mr. Salzman does not expalin how fracturing of a zone at about 10,000 feet could affect an agwuifer at about 300 feet.
One might ask a couple of questions. Is there a newspaper in the city of Denver that has severe financial problems? Yes. Does that newspaper sometimes use articles by Mr. Salzman? Yes. What may we conclude from those facts?
February 26, 2009
4:23 PM
Joe writes:
Hooray!!
Glad to see another liberal rag biting the dust.
As soon as you lose the media Liberalism will start to lose influence. The Universities are the next to go bankrupt and after that all you will have are the courts and Hollywood.
So enjoy, because when Conservatives return we won't be run by the likes of Olympia Snowe and Arlen Specter and we will bury Liberalism once and for all.
February 27, 2009
9:38 AM
vic martinez writes:
To a dying city:
As a Denver native from Park Hill, I have watched the traffic downtown die during the workday. There is no traffic downtown because there is no action.
The newspaper is thin because the job section is thin. With jobs lost to job-hiring companies that divide the city within a city, they don't even know what damage they cause eliminating potential applicants from a computer in another State. There are more recruiters than jobs. Who goes to college to be a recruiter?
Our snobby attitudes isolated ourselves from ourselves. We worry about reporting on the News of Mr Manzaneres, who committed suicide because of the slandering of the city. (maybe we are paying for that)
A city so dry, trees die and blow over. Even the snow decides to pass us by. Am I the only one who grew up here that notices static-electricity worse than Chernobyl? Whats happening to our city?
We must love ourself before we can love others.
By the way, we're moving to Baltimore in May.
Did you know in Philly, where I spent a year, young men stand outside of churches on Sundays selling newspapers to people coming out of church and no one judges the guy selling the paper? I bought them, and they gave me change with Fat Wads of cash like a Las Vegas valet.
It's an accepted practice. Do that here and people will call 9 news to tell on them. (the gossip queens of the city)
man, our city needs help. where's a leader? im moving. God forgive me for my part.