I read this morning that some maverick stockholders who want to shake things up finally got themselves elected to the board of Media General. We'll see.
Lately I've only been reading stories about downtown politics, and Style and the Free Press, even channel 6, are kicking the T-D's butt every day with the story behind the story. The T-D uncovers the rocks and says, see, this is all you need to know. Here's these rocks. The other guys are going, wait a minute, what's under the rocks? Let's look. Argh! Sometimes it changes the whole story, yet the T-D remains good to go with their original findings. You'd think they would look at what the competition was coming up with and go back and dig some more. But they don't.
Claiming to be the local news leader and yet serving so many localities is a contradictory business model. They don't have the space or staff to keep working the story on every front. They say they are, but the proof is in the competition, and it's been really obvious the last couple of weeks.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Posts
3 comments:
The problem with local news coverage has nothing to do with space or staff at the RTD. It has everything to do with new editors, specifically, editors who are not from Richmond, have no institutional memory of city culture, government or politics, who are contemptuous of their reporters, their ideas and utterly dismissive of anyone who has been at the paper longer than they have. If you asked the average reporter at the TD, they would tell you that they do pick up the rocks and see what's under there. It's the editors who stand in the way of telling the rest of the story.
Okay, I can believe that. Who are the new editors answering to? Who is pulling their strings?
Check the masthead or do a little bit of digging through the archives. You'll see which high-level and out-of-town managers and overseers have been hired within the past few years. That's the same period of time, BTW, that has seen a.) dozens of longtime reporters, columnists and editors forced or compelled to leave the paper b.) 'Public Square' PR events substituted for thorough ('under the rock') local news coverage c.) marketing and promotional directors overseeing coverage and 'managing' reporters d.) a mediocre web presence which sees story links go dead after a few weeks and e.) MG's stock price hit rock bottom. It isn't a secret who is ultimately responsible for the Times Dispatch's decline. The big question is why the paper would continue to cut or push out dwindling news staff while somehow managing to retain every bit of the top-heavy, incompetent upper management.
Post a Comment