More belt-tightening at the Char-O

I guess it signals a continuing collapse, with more blending between the Observer and the N&O. A good thing for corporate profits, a bad thing for the watchdog business.

Previously

And even more previously:

________________________________________

When I first wrote about the mind-meld happening between the Charlotte Observer (O) and the News and Observer (No), I couldn't have imagined things would slide down hill so fast. Not so much on the political front, where the addition of Charlotte writers may have even lifted the overall quality of reporting, but just in general.

Normally I'd link to representative stories to demonstrate the Great Decline, but today I'm not feeling so generous. With front-page features two days in a row on the John Edwards Alien Love Child, it's clear that O-No! has hit the skids. From the continuing milquetoast that passes for editorials to the steady reliance on the John Locke Puppetshow for "expert" commentary, the cutbacks at McClatchy are showing big time.

Experienced business people recognize this phenomenon well. It's called the death-spiral. Companies try to sustain their margins by cutting costs, eventually undermining the only competitive advantage they ever had: deep talent and excellence.

It's a sad state of affairs, and a dangerous one. Instead of serving in their long-standing role as watchdogs, too many news media today are themselves part of the corporatization of democracy, complicit in countless ways with the ongoing sell-out of political power to business interests.

__________________________________

The writing on this wall was clear from the minute the two papers came under the ownership of a single corporate parent. That ownership gave them the luxury of a "cut and consolidate" business model, without having to do the hard work of rethinking revenue.

There's no easy answer, but as was the case when this deal was first announced, cutting your way to profitability is a loser's game.

Whatever Orage is out for, I don't think one could say that men and women go into journalism because they're interested in making money. Obviously, though, reporters have to pay bills just like everyone else. Lately it seems that they're barely able to do that, as newspapers bleed jobs. We can't blame reporters for seeking more stable employ. (But dang, I sure hate to see the likes of Ben Niolet and Mark Johnson going to work for the Governor.)

Are two things we're losing due to various races to the bottom. Sad both.

I think I know more people who get their "trusted" news through chain e-mail forwarding. Argh.