It’s Not All Kittens And Unicorns

Editors Note: It is with a great deal of sadness we report that this will be Ed’s last submission here at the Independent, as we received news yesterday afternoon of his passing. Ed will be missed by so many. We are thankful to have known him and to have had him with us here at the Independent for so many years. Godspeed, our good friend, and may your loved ones be comforted in their sorrow and grief. Please feel free to share your thoughts of Ed in the comment section of this, his final article. As we learn more we will post important updates for our readers…

It’s Not All Kittens And Unicorns

– By Ed Kociela –

It’s not an easy conversation, but one that must be had in newsrooms concerned with putting together the day’s report.

That conversation is especially difficult when you consider how the news industry is perceived by the consumer.

Although we are not perceived as poorly as used car salespeople or members of Congress, newsies have pretty low numbers, which is an embarrassment to those of us who have earned our stripes by pounding on keyboards over the years in a desperate hope to bring a fair daily report to your doorstep.

The problem, however, lies in the fact that if you succeed and deliver a fair and objective report, not many people will believe it and will move on to whatever little niche aggregator happens to reflect their particular political or moral, or emotional ideology. Then, they complain about how divisive or harsh the media has become.

That whole media thing is the problem.

Time was back in the day; we did not consider such things as The National Enquirer and the other grocery store tabloids as a part of the media. People magazine was stuffed with fluff, and despite all the lofty claims and occasional flashes of good solid work, 60 Minutes was an unethical mess, springing surprise attack interviews and planting people undercover to rake muck whether there was any or not. The legit guys had to trail behind, much like the guy who follows the elephants and horses in a circus parade and try to tidy the path. While sweeping the scatological debris, they are often the target or the unwashed who complain about bias and negativity.

Look, as we learn early on, news is almost always going to have negativity attached to it or something certainly unique. Dog bites man is not a story. Man bites dog is. And, as far as “good” news, that is nice and warm and friendly? There just isn’t enough of that to go around. Besides, readers soon tire of too much sugar.

The media gets the blame, of course, because it is always easier to shoot the messenger than to suss out the truth followed up with the ignorant, “Can’t you find something nice to write about?” The short answer? Of course, we can. But you wouldn’t read it. We hear about not having enough local content in our media, but the fact is, engage somebody in conversation, and more of the conversation will revolve around Donald Trump than the local county commissioners. They are more likely to argue about Joe Biden’s age or how to fix the economy than how much the city is paying for a new stoplight or widening the roadways. Besides, the bones are so picked over that it is easy to run out of topical stories rather quickly and resort to filling the daily report with advertorials – stories that are written and crafted with the approval of advertisers with the financial wherewithal to buy their way into the newspaper. It is a reprehensible practice and a huge ethical violation when it becomes more and more difficult to separate the fluff from the news. Unless, of course, the publication specializes in chasing ambulances and reporting on traffic wrecks.

We have had, in some form or another, alternative press since the very beginning starting with the pamphlets of the Revolutionary War Era. They were a sort of underground press where alternative viewpoints were allowed to flourish. But, they held certain accountability and faithfulness to ethics, unlike what we are seeing today online or on the air, where unfettered lies can dominate an entire “news” presentation.

I get it.

From the very beginning, we learn that if it bleeds, it leads, that if it sizzles, play it big, and if it is sexy sizzle, play it bigger. We’ve always cared about satisfying readership, you know. But ethics, for the most part, paced judgment.

I am not going to lie. Clicks mean a lot today. And, they should. It is how we afford to continue publishing. It used to crack me up when as city editor for The Spectrum, a caller would call and complain: “You only want to sell newspapers!” My answer was always: “Yes, and McDonald’s wants to sell hamburgers. That’s how they keep the doors open. At least we let you know what went into our stories!”

Money was a factor in the old days, but not as large a factor. Pretty much as long as we made a dollar more than we spent, we were OK because chasing the news was that important. Yes, we had larger companies to consider, but the emphasis was not so much on investors and their dividends as it was on putting out an honest, respected product. Now, money rules all decisions. As a worker bee for Gannett, I went through several years of the company withholding raises, delaying hiring for vacant employee slots, and holding back money for equipment while forcing employees into three weeks of furlough a year (for which we went unpaid) and paying more for benefits while Gannett had more cash on hand than most other American corporations. That money, of course, went to fat cat investors and company officials in the form of dividends, stock shares, and bonuses. I left the company when I got to the point of making more than $5,000 less per year as a result of their feed-the-rich mentality.

They tried the local-only business there, too, but it was an attempt to eliminate as much controversy as possible and keep the advertisers happy. Instead, we ran stupid pieces like the 100th anniversary of a certain automobile with a tie-in to the local dealership or a “best hot dog” contest among two nearby casinos.

And guess what. Even among the crowd of folks who complained that they wanted cute and cuddly stories, it got old in a hurry. People wanted news, not fluff.

So if you are looking for cute and cuddly kittens and unicorns, drop me a line, and I’ll send you a list of Disney or other kiddie flick companies to fill your heart.

Meanwhile, I hate cute and cuddly.

Instead, I’ll be watching “All The President’s Men.”

Viewpoints and perspectives expressed throughout The Independent are those of the individual contributors. They do not necessarily reflect those held by the staff of The Independent or our advertising sponsors. Your comments, rebuttals, and contributions are welcome in accordance with our Terms of Service. Please be respectful and abide by our Community Rules. If you have privacy concerns you can view our Privacy Policy here. Thank you! 

Click here to submit an article, guest opinion piece, or a Letter to the Editor