This is too hard
I should blog more often about the Enquirer and the sins of journalism it commits every single day. But I didn't realize how big a job that would be. Reading the Enquirer more closely than I ever have, I see more and more that this newspaper does so poorly.
Take today: The Tall Stacks "Day 3 Planner" doesn't anticipate the rising river levels that have caused suspension of river cruises this morning. All you have to do is go to this weather page and you can check river levels and projections. Wouldn't you think that would be important in anything called a "planner"?
There's today's nonsensical editorial about God knows what. The Editorial page of the Enquirer is 95% irrelevant, almost never touching on the big issues of the day. It's nice to know, however, that they think we should respect the forces of nature.
There's today's story about St. X's 175th anniversary, which is nice enough, but it notes parenthetically that it's also Woodward High School's 175th. Why doesn't Woodward get the St. X treatment? Do I have to say it out loud?
Then there's what not printed: One of the great court cases of the day is occurring right here in Cincinnati, and that's whether the Bush Administration's warrentless wiretaps are constitutional. There was this result on this week, but you won't read it in the Enquirer, because it doesn't cover the federal courts here.
Many newspapers -- and almost all good newspapers -- have an ombudsman who explains how news decisions are made. At many others, the editor will often write a regular column explaining the news process. But not the Enquirer, which -- if forced to explain itself -- would expose its own stupidity.
Take today: The Tall Stacks "Day 3 Planner" doesn't anticipate the rising river levels that have caused suspension of river cruises this morning. All you have to do is go to this weather page and you can check river levels and projections. Wouldn't you think that would be important in anything called a "planner"?
There's today's nonsensical editorial about God knows what. The Editorial page of the Enquirer is 95% irrelevant, almost never touching on the big issues of the day. It's nice to know, however, that they think we should respect the forces of nature.
There's today's story about St. X's 175th anniversary, which is nice enough, but it notes parenthetically that it's also Woodward High School's 175th. Why doesn't Woodward get the St. X treatment? Do I have to say it out loud?
Then there's what not printed: One of the great court cases of the day is occurring right here in Cincinnati, and that's whether the Bush Administration's warrentless wiretaps are constitutional. There was this result on this week, but you won't read it in the Enquirer, because it doesn't cover the federal courts here.
Many newspapers -- and almost all good newspapers -- have an ombudsman who explains how news decisions are made. At many others, the editor will often write a regular column explaining the news process. But not the Enquirer, which -- if forced to explain itself -- would expose its own stupidity.
posted by Newsache at 12:27 PM
4 Comments:
You are on the mark in all of your observations, but they leave one with the clear impression that the Enquirer could improve if editors so chose. That will not happen because they would have to fire themselves. I worked there. Anyone with any talent runs into a wall of incompetence and amateurism every day. The good ones leave. The duds stay. Callinan is a Gannett hack who moves from paper to paper at the company's command every so many years. He barely talks to his anyone not in his inner circle of fan-bearers and grape-servers. He's too busy keeping his nose clean with Margaret Buchanan and Gannett to think about rising rivers and federal court. He's too old to fight, too young to retire, too much the cicada husk to have any impact on the kind of journalism you seek.
if so many people hate the newspaper - or if it's so bad - why is it still around? these things are charity balls. people buy the paper and the paper sells ads. what am i missing?
I know blogging is hard but you are doing a worthwhile project!
Hang in there. Ventman obviously doesn't understand that the Enquirer/Post incest is the only claptrap game in town. That's why it sells. At least the Enquirer does have the comics, tv schedules and a few lousy coupons.
It's also worth a few giggles every now and again for their partisanship. That's why it's still around, but no one in their right mind takes the Enquirer seriously as a the true local representative of the Fourth Estate.
Yo NewsAche !
Got you and Cincinnati Beacon bookmarked. I've emailed the Enquirer staff about their mis-reporting several times and even got a response from Byron McCauley after I called it a 3rd. rate rag.
The 'Weezer' and Bronson's articles are useless except as filler. Their blog sucks too.
Keep up the good work for as long as you can and I'll read it instead of theirs.
Post a Comment
<< Home