Kill the editorial
Why hasn't innovation had a bigger impact on some of the most basic components of the newspaper?
I’m fascinated by the editorial.
Consider: Newspapers employ dedicated people — sometimes their best writers! — who are relatively well compensated to express an opinion about the topic of their choosing, representing the view of a nameless, faceless entity, “The Editorial Board.”
Because of deadlines and production times, they will almost never write about breaking news. At best, they will write a day or two after events, often using outdated information, while the rest of the world has moved on.
The newspaper also employs editors and designers who will spend hours each day reviewing the editorial, writing headlines for it and laying it out. Digital producers will have to find art for it, write new display copy, post it to an Opinion section and probably the home page, then push it out on social media. While the editorial might be about politics, sports, international or local news, it will be kept separate from the other coverage of those topics.
Think about that description! If the editorial never existed, can you imagine trying to pitch that idea to a modern publication?
It’s honestly hard to come up with a more antiquated or wasteful use of a newsroom’s ever-diminishing resources. So why do papers still publish them?
Allow me to answer my question with a question: How is it possible that the best online treatment for a recipe, a basketball gamer, a story about a shooting, a movie review, a travel story AND an editorial is exactly the same?
The bigger point I’m trying to make is that for all the progress newspapers have made in digital innovation, the most fundamental, daily output of the paper — things like the review, the gamer, the editorial, the advice column — somehow hasn't changed in 20 years.
(F)or all the progress newspapers have made in digital innovation, the most fundamental, daily output of the paper … somehow hasn't changed in 20 years.
I mean, that’s weird, right? And it’s weird that you don’t see it come up much in media criticism/future of journalism pieces. Maybe it’s because it just seems obvious that stories that diverse deserve different tools, different presentations and different ways for users to interact with them, for starters.
There are some obvious reasons for this lack of development — the lousy financial situations and staff upheaval at most papers, the power of print as the main revenue generator, a focus on new modes like blogging and aggregation on the digital side.
I think one of the main culprits though is a little more subtle. Here’s my theory:
1. For decades, newspaper culture has focused on rewarding fixed, one-off accomplishments. Scoops, investigations, special sections and packages, etc, led to awards, raises, promotions and job offers.
2. As newspapers began publishing on the Internet, they did just that — published the newspaper on the Internet. When more digital resources became available (and digital competition emerged), newsroom leaders concentrated digital resources on prestige print projects, enhancing them with special designs, video, interactives and webapps.
And many of them are great, I don’t mean to rag on them. But they also represent a tiny percentage of the output of most newsrooms, and they get a huge amount of resources.
If you think I’m missing something or oversimplifying, do a search for “best online journalism” or “journalism innovation.” There will be lists of the best projects of the year, ONA award winners and grants for new project-oriented tools. But try to find innovation or grants around basic forms for sports stories, editorials and the like. (No, seriously, try, and please send me examples @paujwill or in the comments.)
And there’s so much room to innovate! Look at a game review on Kotaku or the grading tools on an AV Club TV recap or movie review or the game streams used by SB Nation or the card system on Vox. Cleveland.com has stopped doing game stories, letting sports writers break out different points, perspectives and context from the game into multiple posts.
I love newspapers and have spent most of my adult life working for them. Newsroom inefficiency literally keeps me up at night. I don’t honestly expect anyone to kill the editorial. But for all the talk news leaders make about being digital first, reinventing the newsroom or re-examining everything from the ground up, there are some obvious areas for improvement that deserve more attention.
