Innovating for Audience; Danish TV & the Cartoons; Kristof vs. O’Reilly; and More This Week in Media

Every Thursday, we ask Poynter faculty, staff and online
contributors for their impressions of the news of the week. What
surprised them? What was overplayed? Underplayed? What does it mean for
the media? What will they be watching for next week? You
can find this week’s answers below and answers from
previous weeks here.
To contribute your own thoughts on the week in review, click the “Add
Your Comments” link at the bottom of a post. You can also subscribe to
receive “This Week in Media” by e-mail: just click here.

For the week of Feb. 6-10, 2006: 

• Karen Brown Dunlap on “Newspaper Next”
• Jill Geisler interviews Danish TV managing editor on cartoons; and trades Britney for Katrina
• Scott Libin on cartoon controversy
• Kelly McBride on “Dateline,” plus Kristof vs. O’Reilly
• Rick Edmonds on Pittsburgh Post-Gazette & Toledo Blade developments
• Larry Larsen on the undercovered and overcovered stories of the week

“Newspaper Next” Symposium: Innovate or Die 

Karen Brown Dunlap
President

A little bit of change won’t do, Harvard professors told newspaper leaders this week.

Newspapers won’t be able to attract new audiences unless they change
their organizational structures. They need to create autonomous
entities to produce innovations for changing audiences with changing
technologies.

Professors Clayton Christensen and Clark Gilbert and researcher Scott Anthony schooled about 50 media leaders Wednesday and Thursday at the National Press Club in the “The Newspaper Next Symposium,” a session sponsored by the American Press Institute.

Christensen, author of “The Innovator’s Dilemma” and “The
Innovator’s Solution,” used case studies from other industries to show
how leading companies often failed after misjudging the threat of
smaller innovative organizations. Cases included the steel industry,
retail stores, the airline industry and the automobile industry.

One of the “principles of disruptive innovation” is that the new
product or technique “draws a whole new market of people who find the
innovation inexpensive and convenient,” he said.

Yet established industries tend to focus on big changes with high profit margins.

Large airlines which sought greater
profits with larger planes and longer routes opened a door for
Southwest and other regional carriers. Major electronics companies RCA,
Zenith and Westinghouse sought to build sophisticated systems while
Sony came in during the 1960s with cheap transistor radios and portable
televisions and overtook industry leaders.

Another propensity of industry leaders is to recognize the need
for major change too late, Christensen said. “They begin by cramming
aspects of the innovative product into their traditional business
instead of creating something new.”

Case in point, some newspapers dump their printed content on
their Web sites instead of creating meaningful new online
services.

Christensen, professor of Business Administration at
the Harvard Business School, said he found one example in which an
industry leader survived in a time of innovation by spinning off a new
entity. The Dayton Hudson Corporation, once a leading department
store company, traces its roots to 1902.
In 1962, as the industry changed, the company designed a large
discount store called Target. In 2000 Dayton Hudson’s corporate
name was changed to the Target Corporation. In the ongoing evolution of businesses, Target now faces the challenge of innovative online retail competitors.

In developing the new newspaper, leaders need to find out what jobs
newspapers fill or could fill in the lives of readers and non-readers,
Christensen said. That’s different from asking what attributes of
the newspaper appeal to them or what qualities they want or don’t want.

Scott Anthony, a managing director of Innosight, suggested four steps in determining the job for newspapers:

• Keep asking why people need a task done;
• Observe closely;
• Analyze compensating behaviors, including how people use things in unintended ways;
• Zero in on purchasing decisions and learn what really drives the decision.

Anthony and Clark Gilbert,
assistant professor at the Harvard Business School and Innosight
director, led the group through a 10-question “report card” on the
newspaper industry with a scale of A to D.  The group, and earlier
a Task Force, gave the industry high marks for recognizing the need to
change and avoiding needless overhead and wasteful investments. They
gave the industry lower marks in several areas, including looking
beyond the traditional revenue model and communicating the industry
growth story externally.

After discussing the business on Wednesday, on Thursday morning the topic turned to journalism.

As newspapers straddle the line between the present and the future,
many voices wanted to be sure journalistic values are not lost.

John Carroll, former editor of the L.A. Times,
urged colleagues to do a better job combating ongoing negative comments
about newspapers — and reminding readers of their importance.

“Newspapers stand for a certain value,” said Carroll, a Knight Visiting Lecturer at Harvard.

“I realize that we need money to stand, but we’ve got to stand for
something that is more noble and more important than making money.”

The conference is part of an extended project to help develop new business models for newspapers, API President and Executive Director Drew Davis said. The project includes a Task Force to help shape the study. Davis said results of the study will be presented in the Fall.

Related: Newspaper Next Project Wants to Steer Business to Digital Shores (Ad Age)

Different Countries, Different Story

Jill Geisler
Leadership & Management Faculty

Claus Christensen is the managing editor of TV2/East Jutland, which is part of TV2 Denmark, one of the country’s two main broadcast networks. His station covers Aarhus, the second largest city in Denmark and the home of the Jyllands-Posten, the newspaper that commissioned and printed the cartoons portraying the Prophet Muhammad.

Christensen, 35, has an extensive background in reporting and
editing. He attended a Poynter seminar I led on anchor leadership
in 2001. I conducted this e-mail Q&A with Christensen this
week, as he continues to report from the epicenter of the
story. Christensen’s English is very good, but he nonetheless
requested that we copy edit him for clarity.

Jill Geisler: How are you covering the story locally and abroad today?

Claus Christensen: This story is by far the biggest news story in
Denmark this century. Every news medium is covering the story very
closely –- hour by hour. At TV2 there has been a series of special news
shows discussing the perspectives of the story. And of course lots and
lots of breaking news — attacks on the embassies in the Middle East,
demonstrations in countries all over the world, boycott of Danish
goods, threats at the Danish soldiers in Iraq and Afghanistan, etc.

At the local news –- where I work -–
we follow the situation closely in three main areas: We focus on the
newspaper Jyllands-Posten, on the huge dairy “Arla Foods” and
finally on the situation amongst the local Muslim population. Around 10
percent of the population in our main city Aarhus is Muslim, so there
are many angles to cover. “Arla Foods” has its headquarters in our area
— the dairy is being hit hard by the boycott on Danish goods in some
Middle East countries. Up till now we have produced some 200 pieces on
the crisis — and still counting.

Geisler: When the story first broke, months ago, what
discussions did you have in your newsroom about using the cartoons in
your stories?
 
Christensen: We showed the cartoons
after some debate in the newsroom. But the cartoons were part of a news
story. One of our first stories was on some of the cartoonists being
exposed to threats. We felt we had to show the cartoons to cover the
story. I still find this to be correct, as do the vast majority of the
Danish media.

Geisler: Are the cartoons still being shown as part of news
coverage in Denmark? Do different news organizations take
different approaches to showing them?

Christensen: No.
The crisis has taken a turn where showing the cartoons should [happen]
only after much thought. But some news media in Denmark still run the
cartoons when there’s a very important reason to do so. We might
never show them again, and for the time being it’s fair to say that the
viewers know what we’re talking about.

Geisler: How are Danish citizens responding to the stories and your coverage?

Christensen: The reactions in Denmark are very different. But one
thing almost all Danes have in common is disbelief. Denmark as the
center of world attention? We just can’t believe it. Denmark on CNN,
BBC, Al-Jazeera for hours and days and weeks as the leading story? Not
in a lifetime. But we are. It’s not the same story in any two countries around the world.And we still
look at each other thinking: What is happening? We understand now that
the cartoons have offended Muslims around the world. But people still
wonder: What’s the big deal? The gap between our lifestyle and way of
thinking and life in the Middle East has been made very clear. And
I think the Danish people are learning a lot in the process. Many Danes
are looking for answers, trying to understand the reactions from the
Muslim communities. An American newspaper editor just said on
television here in Denmark: “This is Denmark’s introduction to the
complexity of modern life.” So true.

Geisler: What are you hearing from Muslim citizens?

Christensen:
In Denmark most Muslims are calling for peace and understanding. The
Muslim members of parliament are trying to make Muslims in Denmark and
around the world stay calm, insisting on dialogue as the only way to
solve the crisis. In the streets of Aarhus, Muslims and ethnic Danes
are demonstrating quietly side by side in an attempt to show the world
that dialogue and friendship should be preferred to violence. Some
Muslims have been traveling to the Middle East, explaining the Danish
point of view. Some of them have been accused of lying to the Muslim
world in an attempt to make Denmark look bad in the rest of world.
If this is true, we don’t know yet. 

Geisler: You live near the Jyllens-Posten newspaper. How has that affected your life and your journalism?

Christensen: The newspaper Jyllands-Posten is
a highly respected and very modern newspaper. It’s an important part of
the community and the most-read morning paper in our area. Jyllands-Posten
was the first to show the cartoons –- five months ago. It was part of a
news piece on self-censorship. During the last week security around the
paper’s building has tightened, there are lots of threats aimed at
reporters and editors at the building, [and it has] been evacuated
due to bomb scares. These are all news stories that we cover on a daily
basis.

Geisler: What do you want U.S. journalists to know as they cover this complex controversy?

Christensen:
Just this: Self-censorship is the worst kind of censorship. As
reporters we should fight it. This story isn’t about 12 cartoons in a
Danish daily anymore. It seems to be a story about the way the Western
world and the Muslim world interacts. This is the real story, and the
lesson to be learned, I think. But it’s not the same story in any two
countries around the world. You must find the American version of the
story and tell it to the world. I think the rest of the world can
learn a lot from a multi-ethnic society such as the American [society].

Claus Christensen can be reached for comments or questions at clch@tv2oj.dk.

Alternatives for Covering Cartoon Controversy

Scott Libin

The impact of images is on my mind these days due to the continuing
controversy over cartoons depicting the prophet Muhammad. 
 
Many
Muslims and non-Muslims condemn the violence that erupted after
re-publication of the caricatures. Still some people struggle to
understand why the Danish government can’t or won’t apologize for the
actions of a free, independent press — a concept quite foreign in
certain parts of the world, including many where the violence has
occurred. 
 
For American news organizations working
to cover the controversy responsibly, the first guiding principle
Poynter teaches journalists comes immediately into play: seeking
truth and reporting it as fully as possible. That speaks strongly
in favor of showing readers and viewers the images at the very center
of the story. Yet to do so might well cause further offense and
trigger further violence — which surely qualifies as the kind of harm
Poynter urges journalists to minimize. 
 
But should
journalists give greater weight to the concerns of those who have
demonstrated a propensity to riot, burn and attack than to those who
express their grievances using more peaceful means? Does
withholding the controversial cartoons reinforce the rioters’ behavior
by sending the message that their violence is effective — that it
works to suppress content they don’t like?
 
This complex
case is a classic example of the imperative to examine a lot of
alternatives, and not to get caught in the false dichotomy of asking
“whether or not” to publish or broadcast the cartoons. One polar
extreme would be to publish the caricatures out of context, in their
entirety and above the fold, or to drop them into broadcasts carelessly
as teases, wallpaper video or B-roll. The other extreme would be
not to cover the story at all. Between the two ends of the
spectrum lie plenty of responsible approaches that include describing
the images, but not showing them; linking to them in such a way as to
provide context before readers can see the cartoons themselves; showing
some, or parts, but not all of the drawings; and many other
options. 
 
There is ample precedent for this sort of
thing. From Fallujah to funerals picketed by Fred Phelps and his
followers, journalists often confront unspeakable images that are
central to important stories of the day. Often the best question
is not whether to use such images, but how, in what ways, to what
extent and under what circumstances should they be a part of coverage
in order to advance the understanding of readers and
viewers?  
 
I’m not surprised that this story has
gained momentum over the past week, and I believe we will be talking
about it for some time to come. We should. That will help us
be better prepared for the next such challenge. 

Related: Poynter Podcast — Covering the Caricature Controversy; Plus, E-Media Tidbits and Romenesko coverage

Protests, Predators and Professional Rivalries

Cartoon protests: I really want to learn more about
the roots of the protests and riots over the Danish political cartoons.
The week should bring some good analysis on the political and religious
forces at work. Next week I hope we can talk about how vital it is that
the media probe for better sources and deeper understanding, rather
than sticking with the surface-level reaction stories that we saw for
most of this week.

Overplayed: The chatter about “Dateline”‘s third episode of “To Catch a Predator.” This
is the show where volunteers posed as 12-year-old girls in online chat
rooms, hooking up with men, who then agree to meet them in person and
have sex. Only when the men show up, it’s not a girl they meet, it’s
“Dateline” correspondent Chris Hansen and a hidden camera. Then the bad
guys get arrested and the journalists pat themselves on the back for
making the world safe little children.

It’s a tried-and-true gimmick, guaranteed to get people riled up. It
does very little to teach the public about the true dangers of sexual
predators and how to protect children. Several radio and television
talk shows devoted time and energy to wringing their hands and asking
if journalists should be teaming up with the cops like this? Answer:
No. It’s an irresponsible use of resources and it’s done primarily to
provoke an emotional reaction. 

Too funny: Kristof vs. O’Reilly. When you dig beneath their barbs and name-calling, you expose the central divide in America these days. The New York Times’ Nicholas Kristof
wants Americans to look at the impossible human crises of the world and
recognize our own culpability and ability to improve the circumstances.
Fox’s Bill O’Reilly wants Americans to see and hear themselves first
and recognize their power to control their own lives and circumstances.

Trading Britney for Katrina

Jill Geisler
Leadership & Management Faculty

Here’s my fantasy. A reporter from any of the news networks
says: “No, I’m not going to do a two-minute story on Britney
Spears driving with her baby in her lap. If you want to mention it
on the morning show, mention it. But for Pete’s sake don’t assign
me to do a full-blown package on something so trivial, something that
ends up with me interviewing tabloid reporters and pop-culturistas
about ‘what it all means for Britney.’ We know what it really
means. It means WE’RE the tabloid disguised as serious
journalism. Think of the stories we could be covering
instead. I have a list here, starting with kids driven from their
homes by Katrina…”

Here’s my hope. Whenever viewers hear “Britney,” they’ll demand “Katrina” instead.

Finances Trump Editorial Ambition … Again

Rick Edmonds

A call from an alt-weekly reporter in Pittsburgh this week alerted me to something afoot at the Pittsburgh Post-Gazette and its sister paper, the Toledo Blade. The
two-paper Block Communications chain closed its six-person Washington
bureau, leaving a single reporter on Capitol Hill. The move was
announced by business-side, corporate executives without even the fig
leaf of buy-in from editors of the two papers.

That’s not all. The Post-Gazette is opening talks with
10 unions on contracts that expire at the end of 2006. As is
typical, management is seeking flexibility and a lower cost structure,
going so far as threatening to sell if that is not achieved. The
company was run by old-school, public-service-oriented octogenarian
Bill Block until his retirement in 2001. The new generation is
getting urgent about better financial performance. A sign of
distress: the company continues to issue debt offerings at a
stratospheric 9 percent-plus rate, most recently in December 2005.

You may recall that the Blade won a Pulitzer Prize in 2004 for an extraordinarily ambitious investigative piece on a massacre during the Vietnam War. Just last month, the Post-Gazette was one of very few East Coast papers to get the West Virginia miners story right (i.e.
all but one died), in part because they treated it as an extended
regional story and had reporters and photographers on the
scene. It is, of course, logically possible that both papers can
maintain the top-end of their news efforts despite these and future
cuts. As a matter of fact, though, the Pulitzer story, done by two
Toledo-based investigative reporters, only happened because a Pentagon whistle-blower provided a well-documented tip to one of the Washington bureau reporters.

The Newspaper Association of America has been at pains lately to
talk about readership, total audience reach, news economic models and
other signs of vitality in the industry. John R. Block, Post-Gazette publisher, apparently didn’t get the memo. “I hope to reopen a Washington bureau sometime,” he told Editor & Publisher, “but the conditions of the newspaper business stink right now.”