It's amazing that so often the same media outlets that cry out in indignation when someone refuses to answer questions employ the same tactics themselves when their publications are in the news.
The latest instance of this involves the shutdown of Joplin Daily.
The company did not have the decency to explain its actions on the Daily website before the publication was eliminated, and GateHouse Media officials refused to offer any useful comments to Joplin Tri-State Business reporter Ann Leach.
These were the comments given to Ms. Leach in an article in the March 26 edition:
GateHouse Regional Manager Chip Watson- "I don't think that's something we want to comment on," Watson said without explaining when he became more than one person.
Big Nickel Publisher Chuck Elliott- "I have no comment."
No top GateHouse official would go on the record to explain why the newspaper was shut down. With the company's leadership providing that kind of integrity and respect for the public's right to know, no wonder it only thrives in areas where there is little or no competition.
21 comments:
Who cares??????? Besides you being concerned with what Hacker is doing every minute of the day what could the public possibly want to know that could be beneficial. All you want Randy is to continue to stir up the pot since you could never make it as a GateHouse employee. I wonder if Hackers next move is teaching 7th grade communication arts.
The mismanagement of JoplinDaily.com is second biggest story in area media this year after Edgar leaving. It cost area readers the opportunity to learn more about their community and gave advertisers an alternative. I guess there weren't too many interested. But I don't think it was because of a lack of demand.
Wow....what pathetic lives you people must lead if this is the 2nd biggest story after Edgar. I wonder how the community will survive? I hope this doesn't create a state of chaos and a call for marshall law from the mayor.
I have to agree with Mr. Turner on this one. I, too, read the story in Joplin Tri-State Business and was stunned by the refusal of Mr. Watson and Mr. Elliott to provide any insight as to why JoplinDaily.com was scuttled. I thought it was their journalistic obligation as newspaper publishers to be a little forthcoming. After all, the arrival of JoplinDaily.com was much balleyhooed. Surely the readers deserve some explanation.
The only conclusion I drew from their refusal to talk was that they must have had a direct hand in the paper's failure and didn't want to disclose that.
You have to give Hacker credit. Although he still works for GateHouse, he didn't hesitate to point out that the company's failure to promote the new product was a key reason for its downfall.
I'm surprised Gatehouse didn't give Hacker a smack upside the head and put him on the unemployment line with Michelle Pippin for speaking his mind to Joplin Tristate Business.
He noted the company's lack of promoting the paper and cited budget issues which must mean the company didn't pay JoplinDaily reporters squat.
Watson and Elliott said the company line was "No Comment" but Hacker told it like it was. He's definitely da man.
where was the outcry when the tri-state buyers guide ended..in the same fashion. how about the many deaths and resurections of the Herald. It seems to me that you only want an explanation about the things that can stir up the most controversy. unlike most of the posts in this blog...get over it, it's closed, move on.
I don't think Chuck Elliott ever made any kind of public statement during his time as Joplin Daily publisher. He never publically promoted the paper in any way, shape, or form. I guess he sold a few ads; other than that, his contributions were neglible. Did he even realize that he was publisher, and did he know what a publisher is supposed to do? He/she is supposed to be the public face of the newspaper to the community.
beat.....dead.....horse...
....beat......dead.....horse...
...beat.....dead.....horse
Sure, it's a dead horse, but we want to know why the horse died, if its death could have been prevented, and if future equines are also at risk.
great..then i'll be sure to let you know of any dead dogs i see lying next to the road and we can begin the discussion of how they died.
I can't believe that this is too hard to figure out. It was a free paper, dependent upon advertiser support to make it go. Did anyone see the number of ads (or lack thereof) in the last few months issues? It's not rocket science. No ads = no money = no paper.
The cares and don't cares are tied 5-5 with the last comment neutral.
At least we aren't debating about the looks of a TV personality.
Where's the G-Squad when you need them?
14 posts so far. I think that's a pretty good indication that this is a hot topic for quite a few people. Look at some of the other topics on the Turner Report. No responses. Even the people who claim that this is a dead issue are reading and posting.
No surprise that they wouldn't comment. Seems like a moment in which, not having any other way to get the information into the paper, it might have been appropriate to use unnamed sources.
Here's what Chip Watson could have told the interviewer: "Ultimately it came down to the fact that we didn't promote the paper, we didn't sell very much advertising, and that I know very little about running newspapers."
Chuck Elliott could have said: "I was in way over my head, the ship was leaking water badly when I took over as publisher, and I had no clue what to do."
Sure seems to me that there are plenty of you out there that know exactly what it takes to make a newspaper work. I just can't understand why there aren't 14 or 15 of'em being published right now.
The Joplin market simply cannot support that many publications. Only the strong shall survive. It won't be long before the Joplin Business Journal succumbs.
I wouldn't start up a new newspaper in this market... it's not wise.
There are other places where such a venture might prove more fruitful.
Thank you Mr. Chiodo.
Post a Comment