I'd like to use Pluto's departure as an excuse to publicly express a couple of thoughts. In your blog and elsewhere, I see former ABJ newsroom people criticizing the current newspaper. Yes, this is America and everyone is entitled to his or her opinion. But here's my take on those comments.
First, I find it interesting that the key people most involved in the paper's past success rarely criticize the current paper. It's usually people who played a minor role and who generally were carried by the stronger people. Why is that? Because knowledgeable newspaper people comprehend how challenging today's industry climate is and they know how difficult it is to work in that environment. So, until you've walked a bit in their shoes, it's unfair to take swipes at today's Beacon Journal journalists. Or the newsroom management. We just don't know what it's like. (If you want to rail against ownership, you might as well be cursing the weather. There's nothing you can do about it.)
Second, I wonder whether these critics understand how their self-serving rants are viewed. When people say, "The Beacon Journal isn't what it used to be," they are really doing two things. They are relieving their own personal frustrations. And, they are puffing out their own chests in some mistaken notion that the paper has been weakened by their absence. As in, "the Beacon Journal was a great newspaper when I worked there." Get real.
Here's what these negative comments do: They damage the Beacon Journal's reputation and its future - and, perhaps more importantly - these comments hurt the many talented people who still strive mightily to produce a quality daily newspaper. Those people need your support, not your poisonous barbs.
Could the paper be better? Sure. Do I disagree with some of the decisions? Absolutely. But destructive criticism comes from small people with narrow viewpoints. It helps nothing and no one.
Pluto's departure to the competition definitely will hurt the paper on multiple levels. I was saddened to see it happen. However, I won't be pounding on any nails on any coffin. Instead, I'll use this occasion to praise the people who are left and encourage them to keep up the good fight. They deserve nothing less.
Signed: Mike Needs
19 comments:
Amen to Mike.
I know my objectivity is tainted (at least in the reader's eyes) by the fact that my husband is Bruce Winges, ABJ editor, so I won't say more about the quality of the paper.
But if you folks are wondering why you can't get more than a handful of retirees to attend your luncheons, perhaps it's because they have the reputation of being gripe sessions about how good the BJ used to be and how bad it is now.
I would like the opportunity to reconnect with some of my old colleages occasionally, but one of the things I happily left behind when I quit the paper last November was all the complaining.
Bonnie Bolden, 23-year ABJ newsroom editor
I think it's a grin that Pluto's July 28th religious column was titled, "It's Better to Dig In Than Quit".
He knew he was leaving by the 28th.
But perhaps it was a typo.
Maybe "than" should have been "then".
Needs and Bolden must be channeling Bush and Rove with their cries of "when you criticize this administration you are emboldening our enemies and hurting our troops, and you're either for us or against us".
Bush and Rove AND Cheney came to my mind, too.
Since I was never played more than a marginal role in the BJ's past
greatness, deferring always to the Dale Allens & Co. for that honor,
I was quite tempted to respond to Mike Needs' teary defense of those
still toiling in the BJ's wilting vineyards. But upon re-reading it,
I went quietly to my room and said, "Why bother?"
Amen, Abe.
You folks just don't get it. It's really not a complaint about the reporters or copy editors or photographers at the Journal.
It is a complaint about management (Winges excluded since he just started). How many newspapers have gone through managing editors like the Journal has? How long did 'Stache O' Publisher last? What has management done to make the paper better at all? It seems, from this former insider's outside view, not much.
This is the same Mike Needs who as public editor defended the paper's fawing coverage of then-high schooler LeBron James -- coverage headed up by a reporter who was under a personal services contract to Mr. James -- as "perhaps inappropriate but not important enough to warrant corrective action."
I'm glad I sparked discussion. That's great. However, I do feel compelled to respond to "Guiseppe." Not only did I repeatedly urge the Beacon Journal to tone down its LeBron coverage (especially in the early years), but I stood in front of the national convention of the AP Sports Editors and said so. Do you think that was popular? More than that, making up quotes out of thin air is irresponsible. If Guiseppe considers himself a journalist, he ought to rethink that. I never wrote anything like that and Guiseppe knows it. I have an idea. Instead of resorting to name-calling, why don't we use this forum to make constructive suggestions for our former colleagues (assuming you are retired)? Sarcasm doesn't help these good folks in the Beacon Journal who are still doing very good work during very trying times.
-- Mike Needs
I was going to comment in lengh to this blog entry, but believing that Mike surly thinks of me as having played a very minor role, and not being "one of the key people", in which I am sure he includes himself, I have decided too hell with it.
Sorry, Mike, but as friend I thought better of you.
One thing I will say as far as this blog goes.....how about a little less anonymous. If you have something to say, stand behind it.
Don Roese
thank God for the "minor" people. they kept that paper afloat even as the capitains steered into the "ice burgs"
Mr. Needs: You wrote those words to me in an e-mail several years ago when I complained about the fact that David Lee Morgan was under contract to Lebron's family while also serving as the "Lebron writer" for the ABJ.
Guiseppe or whoever you are: Absolutely not true. I guarantee those words never came from me, in any shape or form. If you want to undermine my character, please check the accuracy of your facts. Besides, I was never even remotely involved in any of that Morgan/LeBron thing. Anyway, Harry warned me the attacks would turn personal and they have. I can see that there is little reason for me to continue this discussion.
-- Mike Needs
How can you never have been "even remotely" involved in the conflict of interest issue when you were the public editor at that time? (Which is why I advised you of the conflict.)
The seemingly never-ending Lebron saga was a turning point for many readers of the paper. Frankly, it demonstrated that the Beacon Journal (or "LBJ," as many called it) had ceased to be a serious journalistic enterprise.
I think, Mike, that Bonnie made this personal long before the other posters with her mean-spirited attack of the retirees who gather monthly at Papa Joe's and talk about grandchildren and traveling and, yes, complain -- about their ailments. I expected better from a fellow West Virginian, even if she was defending her husband, the new editor (that part I understand).
I also think, Mike, that you made it personal when you referred to us as "minor" players in the BJ's success who were "carried by the stronger people" and as "small people with narrow viewpoints."
That was demeaning. And you're surprised at the reaction from the "small people"? That seems to be a mighty high horse you think you're riding.
Needs thought he could throw a couple of high hard ones at his former teammates, forgetting that he would eventually have to come to bat himself.
When a couple of pitches whiz by his own ear he whines that the game is too personal, takes his ball and goes home.
Mike, now that you've now managed to polarize several generations of ABJ employees and retirees, my advice is that you offer to shake hands and apologize to those who tirelessly made the ABJ the damned fine newspaper it once was.
Mike, Thank you for your commentary. Tough words, whether we agree or disagree, they needed to be written down.
One word of caution Mike. Don't be too harsh with those of us who are of a 'certain age'. Some of us feel it is our God given right to criticize anything and everything that strikes our fancy. I can tell you that until you yourself reach that age, you can't fully appreciate that fact. That we should do this somewhat responsibly is something we all have to work on. It's a true-ism that yesterday was the 'good old days' for our generation, today is the 'good old days' for the present generation and that tomorrow will be the 'good old days' for our grandchildrens' generation.
I was damn proud of the work we did, especially with the color. It was a difficult road to travel with a lot of obstacles to overcome. Speaking of obstacles, I could mention an editor or two and even some folks on the production side. But, In spite of everything, we did it. I was pissed when the color got taken over by other folks. But I got over it. Now I am very proud of the way those same folks have carried on with the color. The BJ now has a consistent, high degree of excellent color reproduction.
Mike, you are right in that we need to support the folks who are still at the BJ. However we also need to periodically remind those folks how the BJ got where it is today. Integrity, honesty, commitment to journalistic and production excellence as well as a mutual respect for one another and the communities it serves are hallmarks of a great newspaper. Anything short of that is fair game for criticism.
Pat Dougherty
Mike, Thank you for your commentary. Tough words, whether we agree or disagree, they needed to be written down.
One word of caution Mike. Don't be too harsh with those of us who are of a 'certain age'. Some of us feel it is our God given right to criticize anything and everything that strikes our fancy. I can tell you that until you yourself reach that age, you can't fully appreciate that fact. That we should do this somewhat responsibly is something we all have to work on. It's a true-ism that yesterday was the 'good old days' for our generation, today is the 'good old days' for the present generation and that tomorrow will be the 'good old days' for our grandchildrens' generation.
I was damn proud of the work we did, especially with the color. It was a difficult road to travel with a lot of obstacles to overcome. Speaking of obstacles, I could mention an editor or two and even some folks on the production side. But, In spite of everything, we did it. I was pissed when the color got taken over by other folks. But I got over it. Now I am very proud of the way those same folks have carried on with the color. The BJ now has a consistent, high degree of excellent color reproduction.
Mike, you are right in that we need to support the folks who are still at the BJ. However we also need to periodically remind those folks how the BJ got where it is today. Integrity, honesty, commitment to journalistic and production excellence as well as a mutual respect for one another and the communities it serves are hallmarks of a great newspaper. Anything short of that is fair game for criticism.
Pat Dougherty
Since I never gave a thought to whether I was a major or minor player or a player at all while working at the Beacon Journal I don't take offense to whatever is said by either side of this discussion.
Retiring at 60 after 35 years I went out the door with no regrets and looked forward to what life would bring in the time ahead, the BJ life was behind me and it was good, real good.
What I remember are the friendships with the good people (and some bad ones -grin)during that time, but alas, we grew apart, I no longer party with the old friends.
As for the paper now and yore, it is what it is, I read it every day, go for updates of the news to the net and some of the TV news programs.
I think the photo department shines as never before.
Seeing how the former newsroom folks get worked up over issues beyond their control I would remind them that Harry is doing a good job with this blog by informing us what is happening in the newspaper industry, it is worth reading, but NOTHING is as it used to be.
....Ott
As for Needs' comment about minor BJ employees being carried by more important people in the newsroom - perhaps he should observe what happens when a few tiny, "inconsequential" parts are removed from a plane engine.
Post a Comment