About Us
Mission Statement
Rules of Conduct
 
Name:
Pswd:
Remember Me
Register
 

Ombudsman Freshness, In DC -- Yes DC.
Author: Raine    Date: 2011-08-08 12:02:59

Many people aren't aware that many newspapers have a person on staff called an ombudsman. For those that aren't aware of what this position does, let me me allow the Organization of News Ombudsmen explain:
What is an ombudsman?
An ombudsman is someone who handles complaints and attempts to find mutually satisfactory solutions. Ombudsmen can be found in government, corporations, hospitals, universities and other institutions. The first ombudsman was appointed in 1809 in Sweden to handle citizens' complaints about the government. The word is pronounced "om-BUDS-man" and is Scandinavian in origin.

What is a news ombudsman?
A news ombudsman receives and investigates complaints from newspaper readers or listeners or viewers of radio and television stations about accuracy, fairness, balance and good taste in news coverage. He or she recommends appropriate remedies or responses to correct or clarify news reports.
Why should a newspaper or broadcaster have an ombudsman?
  • •To improve the quality of news reporting by monitoring accuracy, fairness and balance.

  • •To help his or her news provider to become more accessible and accountable to readers or audience members and, thus, to become more credible.

  • •To increase the awareness of its news professionals about the public's concerns.

  • •To save time for publishers and senior editors, or broadcasters and news directors, by channeling complaints and other inquiries to one responsible individual.

  • •To resolve some complaints that might otherwise be sent to attorneys and become costly lawsuits.
  • There is far more at the link, but I think you get the gist of what an important job it really is. This is the person (or department) that is the people's representative to media outlets while at the same time they are the media outlets' representative to the people. It can't be an easy job to balance such things. Many times, they are contracted independently to a media outlet. For those that have been there -- think arbitrator. It's a relatively new concept to American journalism -- it's a concept that began in 1967 to serve 'readers of The Courier-Journal and The Louisville Times.'

    I'm sure by now, you are wondering where the heck I am going.... I ask that you just indulge me a few moments of your day.

    A few years ago, The Atlanta Journal Constitution, due to a serious decrease in revenue and readership decided to revamp its entire publication. Along with a decision to decrease circulation, they cut jobs. During this painful process, they held focus groups. They decided to change their editorial and news content based upon those focus groups. This letter from the Editor of the AJC unveils the result:

    This daily newspaper is one designed for newspaper readers. For years our industry has chased those elusive nonreaders. Our market research led us down a different path. What we’d have to do to win over those nonreaders risked driving away our core readers. We believe we can thrive by increasing the satisfaction of those who already engage with us regularly. So … you see a newspaper that looks and reads very much like a newspaper.

    We’ve invested millions in press upgrades, more color and a more newsy, sophisticated look. We hired an award-winning design firm, Lacava Design, from Montreal to help us create a newspaper that is easy to use and filled with information.

    Also along the way, we found ways to do things more efficiently. Our reader feedback proved valuable when economic necessities forced us to scale back plans and coverage. It was our readers who helped us set priorities for what to keep and what could be sacrificed.
    Bold-face mine. To this day, the paper is still struggling. I posted a response in the comments section because - at that point - it was my only choice. The paper had slashed staff as well as delivery. Among the staff released were many international and national reporters. (they decided to rely on news services mainly as a source of information, like Reuters and the AP, for example ) Also on the chopping block was it's Ombusman. There is no position listed to this day. You can email the AJC, but there is no person to put a face to one's concerns.

    Anyway, I replied to this editor's letter. This was my comment:
    Apparently, your testing failed, based upon the majority of comments here on this blog. While I appreciate that you, Ms. Wallace seem to brush off the very people who care about this newspaper — the actual Readers, and defend instead, your testing and your focus groups.

    That is, in an of itself, a sad statement about the approach of this new editorial board. If I wanted “newsiness” I can watch the Daily Show. I don’t want NEWSY, I want NEWS.
    I can tell you personally that the publication, after that redesign (both visually and editorially) -- suffered a lack of objectivity and quality reporting. I can still remember the time when people actually quoted national and International stories from the AJC on message boards and forums (Today it would have been Facebook & Twitter ). These days, it is a rarity. Bob knows about this FAR more than me; he lived in Atlanta -- he watched the decline.

    With that said, this column from the Washington Post Ombudsman, Patrick B. Pexton is so refreshing. It was published August 5. I strongly recommend reading the entire piece. I have truncated it to the best of my ability.
    A populist future for The Post

    I’m worried about The Post’s position in the Washington and national media markets.

    Before I took this job in March, I spent months talking to editors and reporters for most of the publications based in Washington and ones with major bureaus here. All were going through wrenching change and high personnel turnover.

    Cost-cutting and new technologies were only partly responsible for the restructuring. The biggest reason was that their leaders all saw that demand for Washington journalism was growing, not shrinking. And they wanted to retool to preserve or expand their market share.

    (snip)
    The glaring weakness of most, but not all, of The Post’s D.C. competitors is that they’re doing journalism for two limited audiences: fat cats and power elites. The Capitol Hill publications aim for the corporations, K Street law firms and trade associations that can afford thousands of dollars in annual subscription costs. And they are selling to Capitol Hill lawmakers and staffers and executive branch senior officials who must have a constant stream of information, regardless of price.

    (snip -- and THIS is where the homerun happens)

    The Post will always compete with the inside-the-Beltway journals and with the Times. It has to. But its future lies not with the rich; it lies with the citizenry. This newspaper must be the one source of high-quality, probing Washington news that readers in this region and across the country can look to for holding their government accountable. This publication must be for all Americans.

    This means that The Post can’t be a liberal publication or a conservative one. It must be hard-hitting, scrappy and questioning — skeptical of all political figures and parties and beholden to no one. It has to be the rock-’em-sock-’em organization that is passionate about the news. It needs to be less bloodless and take more risks when chasing the story and the truth.

    Where do I get this crazy, almost populist notion? From the readers who write to me by the score every day. Whether they are liberal or conservative, that’s what they want. That’s what they deserve. That should be, and can be financially and journalistically, The Post’s future.


    Whether you live in DC or not, I encourage you to thank Mr. Pexton for saying what so many of us have been thinking, hoping and wanting from our media. You can reach him at 202-334-7582 or at [email protected]. If your newspaper has an ombudsman, I strongly encourage you to contact them.

    I have long said I want neither conservative nor liberal news. I want clear unfiltered news. I am happy to see that I am not alone. We try to encourage people to contact our political representatives, we ask that people vote -- but it is also our responsibility to make our voices heard in the media. This is a good place to start. One person is listening loud and clear. He took a brave and refreshing stance for the people that read The Washington Post. It's rare, wonderful, and refreshing.

    This is the stuff we need from The Fourth Estate.

    &
    Raine
     

    65 comments (Latest Comment: 08/09/2011 04:02:54 by BobR)
       Perma Link

    Share This!

    Furl it!
    Spurl
    NewsVine
    Reddit
    Technorati