Friday, March 27, 2009

Pulitzer Prize-winning writer's comments show why newspapers must change or die for good of the people

Former New York Times' writer Linda Greenhouse -- who won the Pulitzer Prize for her coverage of the U.S. Supreme Court -- recently demonstrated why the newspaper business is in desperate need of an overhaul or extinction.

In this excerpt from the Poytner site: Greenhouse said she left the Times in part because she was asked to do additional, online-only reporting. The changing “news appetite” for immediacy, she explained, did not fit her personal approach to journalism.

Her personal approach to journalism!

That means what you the reader wanted did not mean a damn to her, only her personal approach to journalism, whatever the hell that is.

Perhaps since she won a Pulitzer Prize, Greenhouse merits such an elitist attitude. Yet many other journalists see it the same way. They could care less about the Web and its immediacy, even if it is something that better serves you.

I cannot think of another industry that deserves the ills befalling it than my former profession. It deserted you the reader long before you quit buying the product or advertising in it.

1 comment:

Anonymous said...

Look, Tim, maybe she had had enough of the "feed the beast" mentality. You and I both know that newspapers are notorious for that, even in the old days. Now, with the immediacy of the web, it's worse than ever. Many newspapers just throw stuff willy-nilly online without doing the careful reporting that us old-timers thought was necessary. So this writer doesn't want to do that. Good for her. Why would you excoriate her for that?