, commenting in this February 26 post
Congratulations -- you have successfully used technology to turn journalistic angst into a spectator sport. I wonder what it accomplishes, though. Do you think the honchos in Northern Virginia are going to wake up one day, read your words of wisdom and triple the Enquirer's staff?
When you get tired of beating this dead horse, maybe you could try something more productive, like giving us the thoughtful news coverage that the Enquirer lacks, or finding a job that doesn't make you miserable.
But I'm probably missing the point of a blog ...
This blog is my rant. I speak only for myself. I choose not to provide my name because the Enquirer is run by people who are small minded and vindictive, and I don't need the headache.
I'm doing this because few others are calling out the bullshit that the Enquirer considers to be journalism. Lists are not journalism, calendars are not journalism, and Wednesday's clip-and-save guide to Newport on the Levee is not journalism. Newspapers in cities this size don't have to be so crappy. The Enquirer is crappy by choice. I know there are lots of good people who work in the newsroom, and they work hard. But the people who run the Enquirer have set the expectations very low, because it's cheaper that way. The Enquirer is doing Cincinnati a great disservice, and I'm writing this blog to let them know we're smarter than they think we are, and we can see what they're doing. I think most of what I do here is to state the obvious.
I keep tabs on "more awards the Enquirer didn't win" to point out the paper's total lack of ambition. You can't even do good journalism if you're not trying to be great once in a while. I'm sorry, but the Ohio AP awards aren't a big deal. And though the Enquirer won two awards and two honorable mentions in the Associated Press Sports Editors competition
, 45 newspapers won awards in their bracket (100,000-250,000 circulation). There were 10 winners in every category, so it's hard not to win something
Aside from Borgman's
Pulitzer for editorial cartooning, the Enquirer has never won or been a finalist for a Pulitzer for its reporting, photography or criticism. It's not impossible for a newspaper in a city like Cincinnati to win. Just since 1980, the Louisville Courier-Journal has won 3 Pulizters
and been a finalist 5 times. The Cleveland Plain Dealer, the Toledo Blade, the Dayton Daily News, the Lexington Herald-Leader, the Indianapolis Star and the Pittsburgh Post-Gazette have all won Pulitzers since 1980. Even the Lorain fucking Journal was a finalist in 1985. Just so you know, they don't give Pulitzers for local reporting. Dayton's 1998 Pulitzer was for National Reporting. The Enquirer has goose eggs, and Cincinnati is not to blame. The Enquirer just doesn't know how to be great, and has no desire to be.
So, read this blog or don't read it, I don't care. Like or don't like it, I don't care. I know Tom Callinan and the boys in Northern Virginia aren't reading this, so I don't harbor any delusions that this blog will somehow make the Enquirer better. You can call me a whiner, call me an arse, tell me this blog has deteriorated from "intelligent criticism," I don't care. This is not a full-time job for me. I write when something moves me and when I have the time. I never promised anyone intelligent criticism. The truth is the Enquirer commits that one great sin of journalism every day -- it's just boring -- and most days there's very little you can say about that.
[ UPDATE: This year there is a Pulitzer category for local reporting, which replaces beat reporting. This article
speculates on who will win when the awards are chosen next week. Guess which newspaper isn't mentioned. ]