Cleveland/Cuyahoga's incredibly shrinking daily newspaper is community loss

This is a sad day for Cuyahoga County residents and most of them don’t even know it. The area’s principal daily newspaper, in the callous emotionally unintelligent manner for which its ownership/management is becoming known, delivered pink slips in the form of phone calls to fifty or so of its editorial personnel. Those laid off — a euphemism, given the likelihood of their recall is de minimis — include reporters and others who carry much of the paper’s institutional memory.

Among the departed are reporters Margaret Bernstein and Stan Donaldson. I can say without fear of contradiction that no Plain Dealer writer has ever covered Cleveland’s black community with more insight, sensitivity and affirmation than Margaret. Her eyes and voice will be sorely missed.

Stan Donaldson brought a professional approach to his reporting that will likewise be missed. He worked with unflinching focus on uncovering real community stories.

While I have never been a PD fan, I have always been a regular reader. The fact that they left so many stories untold or and skewed others with serious myopia or prejudice does not obscure the positive values of having a community wide source of information. Staying informed about our community has just gotten harder.

COUNTDOWN TO FEBRUARY: Worse Than it Looks

When I posted yesterday about speculation whether our fair city was about to become the nation’s largest municipality without a daily newspaper — many expect Advance Publications, the Plain Dealer’s corporate owner, to move sometime before June to a thrice-weekly publication schedule — I omitted to provide one of the best sources available to remain abreast of this sad saga. That would be  PD NOW WHAT, a site that Afi-Odelia Scruggs set up to report on the latest news on this topic.

Afi came to Cleveland two decades ago to write for the paper; today the talented and well-respected writer describes herself as an independent digital journalist. Yesterday she reported that the Plain Dealer is looking to reduce its newsroom by as much as one-third.

This is nearly unfathomable. And when I stop to ponder what this means for local news coverage, especially coverage of what I believe have long been underserved populations, namely working-class, inner–city, and African American communities, the picture is devastating. It gets even worse when I consider these two facts: the Plain Dealer chose some time ago to broaden its footprint by reaching out to neighboring counties: it now reports routinely on communities in Medina, Summit, Geauga, and Lorain counties. This expansion in my view has come at least partially at the expense of Glenville, Hough, Fairfax, Mt. Pleasant, Maple Heights, Warrensville Heights, East Cleveland, etc.

Secondly, this geographic expansion of its news coverage area is thinly justified by the misnamed local news coverage of Sun newspapers, a thin group of mushy and pretty much lily-white suburban weeklies that cover parts of four counties and are also owned by Advance Publications. As I have had occasion to remark many times over the last few years, the Sun chain has strategically and systematically withdrawn from virtually every community that has undergone any radical demographic change. These local papers pretty much wholly refused to report on or even acknowledge the changes and their implications. Essentially, Sun newspapers ignored the newcomers, thus giving them no reason to invest time or dollars in supporting the papers. Sun then pulled the plug on those publications, citing what else, lack of support from those same newcomers.

I could make an economic case for why Advance has essentially abandoned Euclid, Bedford Heights, Collinwood and other communities in both its daily and weekly products. But I can only imagine how ghostly the gaps in coverage will become if the Plain Dealer loses a third of a current workforce that is already strained to provide even sieve-like coverage of much of its home county. I mean, should it take thirteen copsfiring 137 shots at two people who were possibly unarmed to get Plain Dealer reporters to go into East Cleveland? [Note: the passenger's death has just been ruled a homicide.] If that scene repeats itself twelve months from now, it may be like a tree falling in a Forest City with no one around to hear.

COUNTDOWN TO FEBRUARY: Cleveland to Be Largest US city with no daily paper?

Last month we wrote here about the uncertain future of the Plain Dealer’s daily publishing schedule. 

Speculation about that future is now heating up even as the paper’s employees bask in the support of the nearly 6,000 readers who have signed their online petition in support of the PD's continued daily publication.

The paper's future is the subject of the December 2, Media Decoder column/blog in yesterday’s New York Times, which mentions that the “Save the Paper” campaign will be the subject of a party this Thursday at the Market Garden Brewery.

Last week former Plain Dealer reporter T.C. Brown, writing in the well-respected Columbia Journalism Review, examined the looming reduction of the PD’s footprint from the standpoint of its likely effect on political coverage in Ohio. While he is kindly disposed to the paper as a whole, his discussion of its owner’s track record is not reassuring to anyone who appreciates the value of a robust news organization. He makes a point of contrasting Advance Publications’s corporate preference to cut and slash staff and costs with that of billionaire folk hero Warren Buffett, who has been buying local newspapers with the intent to invest in them. Brown’s connection to the Plain Dealer helped him secure a number of interesting perspectives from the paper’s employees.

The latest publication to weigh in on the implications of the Plain Dealer’s likely shift to a three-day print schedule [Wednesday-Friday-Sunday?] is Crain's Cleveland Business. Our friend Jay Miller's front-page report, out today, considers the PD’s assumed print reduction from the standpoint of its advertisers. The headline of his article, “Ad buyers slowly see importance of daily PD wane”, unfortunately captures the way many readers feel when considering how local news coverage has been steadily diminishing.

Can you imagine the Browns finally winning the Super Bowl and the next day having to go find a copy of the Akron Beacon Journal for a hard-copy account?

Is there a bright spot in any of this? Well, The Real Deal intends to publish at least daily through the end of this year. So check back regularly even if you do not receive an advisory email from us. Of course the best way to keep abreast of our reports is to subscribe to our blog or become a follower, easy non-invasive options at an unbeatable price. See the top right of this page to make your choice.

Hope to see you back here tomorrow, at our oasis of reliable news and reasoned commentary.

PD to cut staff, schedule? Its journalists think so

Plain Dealer staff are kicking off a campaign this week to counter an expected move by the paper’s owner, Advance Publications, to reduce core editorial staff and possibly change its seven days a week publishing schedule, according to this piece from the well-respected Poynter Institute.

The report by Andrew Beaujon, who writes a media column for Poynter,  begins this way:

Plain Dealer journalists plan pre-emptive campaign against reduced print, staff cuts

by Andrew BeaujonPublished Nov. 9, 2012 5:54 amUpdated Nov. 9, 2012 8:55 am

Advance Publications hasn’t said whether it intends to reduce the publication schedule or staff at The Plain Dealer, but journalists at the Cleveland paper want to get ahead of any decision their owners might make.

The Save The Plain Dealer campaign will start this weekend, Plain Dealer science writer John Mangels tells Poynter in an email.

The multi-media campaign will begin Sunday with a half-page ad in The Plain Dealer, to be followed by bus and billboard ads throughout the city. TV and radio ads will appear soon. There will be mass mailings and e-mailings to elected officials, political and business leaders and other people of influence. We’ll have a Facebook page with an abundance of content, a petition on Change.org, and a Twitter feed. We’re also working to organize community forums where we’ll discuss the future of journalism in Northeast Ohio, and the potential impact of the loss of the daily paper and much of its experienced news-gathering staff.

Advance owns a number of major market newspapers. Earlier this year it announced that The Times-Picayune of New Orleans would publish only on Wednesday, Friday, and Sunday. 

The Poynter piece may be found here.

Guess it's time for The Real Deal to expand.

Real Deal mini-pieces: Richmond Heights, Nina Turner, Nonprofit Thursdays

   1. Today’s Plain Dealer carries a piece by editorial writer Joe Frolik [“Surviving the suburban squeeze”, page A5] in support of old-line Richmond Heights city leaders proposing a tax increase. Frolik gives not even a nod to the strong opposition of half the members of the city council’s finance and audit committees to the tax increase at this time.

We don’t intend to debate the merits of the tax increase here [Issue 91 on the ballots of Richmond Heights voters], but to call attention once again to the paper’s establishment biases. No one appears to disagree on the city’s difficult financial circumstances but the people calling for the increased revenue have not shown themselves to be good stewards of the city’s finances. 

Councilwoman-at-large Miesha Wilson Headen has raised reasoned objections to the tax increase. She points out that the city has failed to reconcile its bank accounts for almost three years, producing an audit finding of $40,395 gone missing in 2007 and 2008. 

In arguing that Issue 91 is ill conceived, hasty, and premature, Headen also cites the city’s failure to file Annual Financial Statements since 2008, in defiance of state law.

Surely these concerns are worth at least a mention in a column that hawks the views of the city’s long-established leadership.

22. Frolik is also on the bandwagon for fostering regionalism in Cuyahoga County and therefore gives an even more direct endorsement of Richmond Heights Issue 90, which would amend the city’s charter to facilitate the sharing of critical services like police and fire with neighboring communities. This is indeed sensible, so I guess that makes it o.k. to omit any reference to the way the city’s school system is about to implode, thanks to a long succession of school board members run amok with political concerns to the detriment of the children whose education should be their principal focus.

33. For those who take note of such things, the website Politic365.com is reporting that State Senator Nina Turner has filed paperwork creating an exploratory committee to run for Congress. The Real Deal has been unable to confirm this report. Federal election law generally does not require the filing of such a report prior to a candidate’s declaration of candidacy.

44.We will launch Nonprofit Thursday here this week, inspired in part by the interest generated by our posts last week on the Huntington giveaway, but also by a recent conversation with our good friend Dick Peery. So for those of you executive director and trustee types who are not yet regular visitors, make a note to stop by here Thursday morning.

Of "Secrets" and Transparency, Part I

Far too much has already been written about the December 3 meeting at the home of county councilman-elect Julian Rogers, especially by our local daily. The Plain Dealer has led the chorus denouncing what they so obviously enjoy referring to as the "secret" meeting that resulted in the agreement -- now in tatters -- among six members-elect to support C. Ellen Connally for president and Dale Miller for vice president. The vote was to have been last Monday but that was scuttled under the PD's intimidating bullhorn and angry spotlight.

There has been too little analysis accompanying the outrage, however, so a week later we offer our assessment of this tempest. We do acknowledge however, that the paper did offer what was likely a fair sampling of public commentary on its website, even citing two of our favorite bloggers, Anastasia Pantsios here and Jill Miller Zimon here.

Our first observation is to note that calling the meeting "secret" is inaccurate. There is no evidence that the organizers or attendees intended to keep knowledge of the meeting hidden. That this was never a goal is clear, given that councilman-elect Chuck Germana was told about the meeting beforehand but not invited, pretty much a surefire way to get the word out.

Further evidence that the meeting was not secret was that we were able to report its results almost immediately afterwards. Our informant was not at the meeting but had received the news from one of the key attendees who had called to share it. So even after the meeting there was no press for "secrecy".

In short, the meeting was "secret" only if you define secrecy as being not broadcast via press release or open to the media and general public.

A better characterization of the meeting is to say it was "private", in the sense of not being open to the public.

Did the meeting violate what Cuyahoga residents voted for when they passed the new charter? I don't know, although there are lots of folks who are screaming "YES". But do not count me among the presumptive mindreaders who now speak with precise authority about what voters wanted last November.

The result of that election was clear. The vast majority wanted change. Heck, even many opponents of Issue 6 and/or supporters of Issue 5 [not necessarily the same people] wanted change. It is a near-certainty that most of us wanted an end to corruption and nepotism, more honesty and openness, greater efficiency, more transparency, fewer executive sessions and an end to backroom deals regarding the expenditure of public funds.

Did we even discuss how the council president would be selected? Did we want less partisanship? Arguably, but the drafters and promoters of Issue 6 gave us a complete charter, crafted behind closed doors, that did not call for nonpartisan primaries or elections.

Let's be clear. We also wanted smarter government than the 19th century commissioner system and the six council members-elect have gotten off to a poor start in assuring us that we will get it. They could have found a better way to select their leadership, and they most certainly should have been more courageous about it.

In my view, council members should never have promised a public process, only a transparent one. The difference: the Democratic members had a right to caucus, and should have explained the circumstances under which it was appropriate to caucus. They should have then announced that they were going to caucus, worked our their leadership, and then announced the results. Transparency achieved.

The larger point that needs addressing is where we go from here. We are a fragile and fractured polity, and we are like the generals fighting the last war, with too little regard for how the landscape has changed. We will talk about this tomorrow.