It's not often that I read a column that expresses my exact thoughts about a subject, but that happened this morning with a column posted on the Columbia Journalism Review website.
The author talks about being charged $404 (and that was after he trimmed it somewhat) to have his mother's obituary placed in the Kansas City Star. The columnist claims that newspapers' disconnect with readers may have started the day someone figured out they could add an extra revenue stream by charging for obituaries.
He hit the nail right on the head.
As I recall, the Joplin Globe was the first newspaper in this area to charge for obituaries and there was an immediate backlash against the practice. It didn't matter. It was a corporate decision and no one in Joplin had any say about it anyway.
Now everyone gets a brief two or three line description that says nothing in the Globe's "Deaths" section, but you have to pay through the nose for anything else.
If your family has the money or the inclination to give in to these vultures who hover over the deceased's loved ones seeking to make profit from their grief, your life means something. If not, you pass from life as quietly as you entered it.
It may have helped the paper's bottom line, but don't tell me that the resentment has subsided; it hasn't, and that may have served to pare the newspaper's circulation in the long run; there is no way of telling since no surveys have ever been done on the topic, but I have heard anecdotal evidence that supports that theory.
Once one newspaper chain found extra dollars from those no longer able to object, it was not long before all of the others joined in. It is hard to find newspapers that remember a basic fact: Not only are obituaries news, but that section of the newspaper is one that has an extremely high readership.
I have written many times on this blog about the treatment of the dead by newspapers. Most of the time I have been referring to people who are prominent or who have been prominent in the community, or people who have been connected to some major news event. Area newspapers have done a much better job in recent months in that regard.
Each life, however, has touched others and the idea that someone's life has no meaning because his family does not have money or because the survivors do not want to give in to extortion goes against every value that community newspapers should represent, and at one time did.
12 comments:
Amen Randy! It's incredibly sad that people throughout their lives are divided by the "haves" and "have nots", but to have this even in death is a crime.
Randy, you're right -- paid obits are shameful. Part of my job when I started out in newspapers was writing obituaries, and there is an art to it -- everyone's life is unique and should be treated as such. It is hypocritical for newspapers, including mine, to profess to serve their readers while charging for the last word that will ever be said about them. This is yet another example of the attitude that pervades this country -- we aren't citizens anymore, just consumers. Rest in peace, and thank you for choosing CNHI.
Amen to Randy and Max! Newspapers question why their numbers are dropping and ignore reasons such as this. Obits are cheap to produce and attract readers. Imagine the good will that the Globe would create by reversing this awful decision. The CNHI management, ironically, is too stubborn to see anything but $$$$.
Thanks for saying (both Randy and Max) what I have been feeling for years. Yes, it is rather shameful to charge for an obituary. (And shame on them.) May their papers continue to dwindle until they reconsider. This is one thing they can't blame completely on the internet.
Kinda like stealing off the graves in cemeteries.
Randy and Max, you guys are right on target on this one. The dead used to be treated with respect and a person could expect to have at least one story in the newspaper in their lifetime: their obituary.
To quote the late great Frank Zappa: "They're only in it for the money." Some things you do because you should, not because you can make a buck. Sell those god-awful wedding notices, with the "the bride wore a white satin gown trimmed in sequins and a 12-foot bridal train" descriptions. Honestly, who gives a s---?!!! But don't steal the pennies from the dead man's eyes.
Oh well, it's time for another beer.
Randy: Obituary writing used to be an important discipline; it taught reporters sensitivity, tact and how to interview people under stressful conditions. Now it's a steady revenue stream for daily newspapers, and who cares what the reader thinks?
Thank you for writing this post.
The Joplin Daily, unfortunately, also charges for obits. I was hoping they would try to set themselves apart from the Globe, but alas, no. Apparently, it's company policy that they charge for obits and wedding/engagement announcements.
Well said, Randy. I stopped my subscription to the Globe long ago when they started charging out the nose for the obituaries. I have done the same with the Daily now. It would earn great respect in my view if one newspaper would stop charging. Then maybe the others would follow. This should never have been started.
Everyone is correct, you should never charge for an obit. Whatever happened to respect, love, and understanding? Have we all become so money hungry that we can't even show compansion in such a time of sorrow & grief? Not everyone in the U.S. is rich and can afford the cost to do so. In a time of grief the last thing you need is a dollar for this, a dollar for that. Why spend money after death if the person could not afford to during their life time. Get real people. Let's get back down to earth and respect the deceased.
Amen, stated very nicely gentlemen. Wake-up America. Get back to respecting the deceased!
Thank you guys for stating the truth.
Post a Comment