|
Wednesday, July 4, 2007
Previous topic
|
Next topic
|
|
 Wednesday, July 4, 2007
started 7/4/2007; 10:53:10 AM - last post 7/7/2007; 12:36:15 PM
|
|
Doc Searls - Wednesday, July 4, 2007 
7/4/2007; 2:53:10 PM (reads: 4514, responses: 6)
|
|
Wanted: less fire, more works 
| | Turns out Wendy's print piece was the shortened version of a much longer essay with her byline that the paper put up at its website. It begins with an editor's note: |
| | The Los Angeles Times recently refused to publish, in its print or online editions, a commentary by News-Press owner Wendy McCaw. The opinion piece responds to two lengthy commentaries by Lou Cannon and former News-Press editor Jerry Roberts that the Times published online. |
| | The world has passed you by. Young people today no longer wear watches, no longer read newspapers, no longer watch TV news. They communicate by text messaging and in MY SPACE. They distrust the mainstream media, in large part because they distrust the decrepit ideas asserted by the old generation who claim to be "experts" such as yourself. You exemplify the basis for this distrust with your reference to "various inquiries" allegedly finding that we committed some journalistic sin. |
| | This is the essence of irresponsible journalism and at the core of your deserved loss of reputation. Instead of relying on purposely uninformed bloggers and the biased "journalists" they support who are attempting to insert the Teamsters Union into Santa Barbara's mainstream newspaper for supposed facts, why not roll up your sleeves and do some real investigative work? I challenge you to state a single legitimate agency "inquiry" that has found we violated a journalistic standard. None exists. It is simply more evidence why certain journalists today have committed a grave disservice to the public they claim to serve. |
| | For decades, reporters who had no ownership interest in the product they produced were allowed to say whatever they wanted. They ran the newspapers even though they didn't own the newspapers, with no heed paid to the bottom line. While these journalists claimed as "theirs" the newspapers by which they merely were employed, they acted in total disregard for whether the paper was profitable enough to ensure it would survive into the next year, much less the onslaught of the cataclysm of the Internet. The end result is that countless newspapers today face massive declines in circulation if not outright collapse. The L.A. Times is laying off hundreds as is the San Francisco Chronicle. Circulation is down all over the country. The time has come for the owners of these papers to step in and see to it that they are run in a proper business fashion. |
| | The journalists, such as you, Mr. Cannon, who had nothing at stake but still exercised dominion and control for so many years over business entities they never owned, turned out to be the worst of stewards of the public's need for a long-term journalistic presence. |
| | I purchased this paper because I believe in it as an institution and as a business to earn money. It is my capital that needs to be protected and preserved, and no employee of mine has the right to tell me to "butt out" of my own business. Clearly, we have completely divergent views on the very basic right to run one's own business in a manner that ensures the survival of that business. In your hypothetical world, employees with thread-bare allegiance to the business are able to act any way they want, including publishing "news" stories from a single point of view, regardless of the impact on the bottom-line profitability of the business. Not a single business owner in the country would agree with your approach to running a business. |
| | You, Mr. Cannon, own no newspaper and never have. You and your brethren chose to malign me with the same slights mouthed by the Teamsters Union in its campaign of distortions and personal invective. You compare your earned "reputation" with a dig at the fact that I am a female business owner. You do so by suggesting that you earned your reputation, while I gained my wealth through a legal settlement or inheritance, neither of which is true or relevant. The fact that I and my former husband started and successfully grew the first major cellular network in the country and sold it to AT&T is something I am quite proud of. Every woman who works with her husband, and/or supports the family's business success, must cringe at your chauvinist comments. |
| | You assert you are beholden to no union, yet your words mimic the antics of a Union with the gravest history of corruption in its campaign against the News-Press and me as its owner. Let's face it, Mr. Cannon, you are not only beholden to this Union but you are its foil, its tool in its campaign to destroy the News-Press simply because I own it. |
| | It goes on. The above isn't the half of it. |
| | While the News-Press is one of the few papers (in fact the only one to my knowledge) that locks up even current daily editorial behind a paywall, this piece is out in the open and linkable. Turns out the whole subdirectory called commentaries is exposed. There you'll find other linkable pieces that make Wendy's and the paper's cases. This is a good thing. In fact, I'd like to suggest to Wendy that it's a good start. |
| | After nearly a year of fireworks, I think it's time for some olive branches here. I have a few in mind, but not time to write about them right now. It is the 4th, after all. |
| | Have a good one, and stay tuned. |
discuss
|
|
greg - Re: Wednesday, July 4, 2007
7/5/2007; 2:30:55 PM (reads: 1410, responses: 2)
|
|
|
Gee, what an interesting argument. On the one hand, she's on the side of the young folks and their txt and MySpace and all the implied challenge to old notions of authority and the ascendancy of community. On the other she's saying that only people who own papers have any legitimate claim to them. Screw the people who "merely" work for them, let alone, I'm sure, the readers who "merely" read them. This is offensive to me as a former journalist, a continued newspaper reader, and a Cannon (no known relation to Lou) ;-)!
discuss
|
|
Damien Riley - Re: Wednesday, July 4, 2007
7/5/2007; 6:31:29 PM (reads: 1351, responses: 0)
|
|
|
I think it's great to read someone make their point without getting caught up in emotion that they sound stupid. This is a very effective example of a well made point in an editorial.
discuss
|
|
Doc Searls - Re: Wednesday, July 4, 2007
7/5/2007; 10:19:31 PM (reads: 1529, responses: 1)
|
|
|
It is strange. But I think it's good for her to vent. It's telling that she has approximately zero defenders out there, though.
discuss
|
|
greg - Re: Wednesday, July 4, 2007
7/6/2007; 3:34:08 PM (reads: 1701, responses: 0)
|
|
|
She doesn't seem to want any defenders. I guess when you own the paper you can pretend you don't need any. Any idea what's happened to circ. through this whole batch of silliness?
discuss
|
|
John Wiley - Re: Wednesday, July 4, 2007 - Santa Barbara Open Source?
7/7/2007; 2:40:48 AM (reads: 1426, responses: 1)
|
|
|
What if July 4, 2007 were the beginning of Interdependence Day? I'd like to see those of us living in this remarkable paradise pool our resources to contribute toward a new world where everyone's needs matter equally and we find ways to collaborate.
The fading illusion of power held by central media like the News Press might be illustrative of new opportunities for alternative media, just as Linux provides alternatives to MS and Apple. I'm moved to do something that might contribute toward such opportunities, by acting locally.
I found this blog by googling linux santa barbara. I miss the SBLUG meetings, and got to wondering if there's anything similar or anyone interested in it.
Something I'd enjoy helping create is a new group devoted to Open Source, with meetings here in Santa Barbara. It could focus on all things open, and provide a meeting place where we pool resources. I could probably create an Adult Ed class to host it so we'd have a modest fund for freebies and resources. I'm willing to donate some time and funds myself to help it happen, and can host meetings at my community hall (154@Cathedral Oaks) until they grow to over a hundred or we find someplace better.
My own related interests currently include Linux, Drupal, and GPS. My guess is that others here could add greatly to that short list. Maybe someone would know other (and surely more effective) places to open this topic, including on this blog.
Any other Santa Barbarians interested in such things? Let's talk.
John Wiley
discuss
|
|
Doc Searls - Re: Wednesday, July 4, 2007 - Santa Barbara Open Source?
7/7/2007; 4:36:15 PM (reads: 1613, responses: 0)
|
|
|
John, send me an email (doc AT searls dot com) with your number. Love to talk about it.
discuss
|
|
|
Copyright 2009 The Doc Searls Weblog
|
