Friday, December 19, 2008

USAT's Curtis: Media's watchdog role endangered

In a new Poynter Online Q&A, retiring USA Today Managing Editor/Design Richard Curtis spoke to George Rorick, who worked for him at Gannett's flagship newspaper. Here's an excerpt, followed by a videotaped interview Curtis gave last spring to former Newsweek graphics director Karl Gude.

I think without a healthy, unencumbered newspaper model to provide a watchdog role over public officials especially -- it does not speak well for the future of the country. I think we have to do everything within our power to guard against that happening.

However, the business models haven't been developed that are going to make that watchdog journalism sustainable, except on a national level. Having worked for a national news organization all of these years, I can tell you that it's almost impossible to shine that spotlight into the dark corners of local government from that perspective. . . .

I don't think the business model is there for the Internet -- despite people saying that the growth in online advertising is doing so well. They're charging pennies for it. And pennies will not sustain the kind of rigorous journalism that's necessary, unless journalists are willing to work for free.



Related: More video favorites on Gannett Blog's YouTube channel

[Image: today's front page, Newseum]

7 comments:

  1. Interesting that this same man who sings the praises of the glory days also helped dismantle the print staff at USA TODAY. The print graphics operation is a total mess as he rides off into the sunset.

    ReplyDelete
  2. Curtis drove a number of people out in recent years. And he did little to protect those who didn't leave on their own. I feel like he has some Rev. Jim Jones in him. He built up his little kingdom, then torched the place before he himself checked out.

    The previous comment/post is accurate. The graphics or design department, or whatever they call themselves, is a disaster area at USAT. Too many competent, decent people who knew the ropes have left -- many for all the wrong reasons.

    ReplyDelete
  3. When the public officials who are corrupt are Democrats, that watchdog always seems to go blind. "Nothing to see here, just MoveOn"

    Charlie Rangel has been pocketing cash and getting sweetheart deals for himself for years, but to the "watchdog media", being a liberal and a minority gives him a license to steal.

    ReplyDelete
  4. 3:25 pm:
    Please review the "liberal" NYTimes recent reporting on Rangel. What you've learned about Rangel through blogs and other sources probably originated with it.
    And, like almost all news content these days, you paid nothing for it.

    ReplyDelete
  5. A couple things: When I think of watchdog journalism, I don't think of USA TODAY. If you want to know about American Idol or sports, yes, it's a pretty good source. But watchdog journalism? No hard-hitting commentary, no Pulitzer Prizes, nothing to compete with the big boys at the Post or Times, or even some of the smaller papers. Oh, and the web site is even more shallow.

    Secondly, is there a manager or editor left in the graphics department who has a clue as to what it takes to get graphics into the newspaper? Didn't Mr. Curtis himself just axe someone who had a pretty good feel for not only the journalism involved with graphics but what it takes to actually produce them?

    This department has been sliding for quite some time as Mr. Curtis apparently stood by and watched it happen and may have even helped accelerate the process in my humble opinion.

    I credit him for many accomplishments and innovations back in the day (although he had a lot of help with that), but besides a few talented remaining artists, his department is now an under-producing, error-making, loosely-run wasteland that I and others avoid like the plague. It does seem like he purposely blew it up or was just powerless to do anything about it falling apart. Either way, it's gotten especially awful recently.

    ReplyDelete
  6. Comments on politics are fine -- so long as you please keep them focused sharply on Gannett.

    ReplyDelete
  7. I suspect the true reason Curtis recently axed so many with skill was his attempt to cut the department's salary to save his own salary.

    Curtis never tolerated anyone with talent who could challenge his position in the company. The graphics/photography department was ruled as his fiefdom.

    Many of his quotes in his retirement article waxing poetic about hiring good people and getting out of their way, or giving them the opportunity to do what they do well, are total manure.

    "Curtis: Maybe I held the door open for you and you just fell through, George." This is the type of put down I expect from Curtis.

    Curtis opened the door while sticking out his leg to make sure everyone tripped on their way into his kingdom.

    May he spend his retirement years drawing his little NASCAR doodles far from any real journalism product.

    ReplyDelete

Jim says: "Proceed with caution; this is a free-for-all comment zone. I try to correct or clarify incorrect information. But I can't catch everything. Please keep your posts focused on Gannett and media-related subjects. Note that I occasionally review comments in advance, to reject inappropriate ones. And I ignore hostile posters, and recommend you do, too."

Note: Only a member of this blog may post a comment.