What has happened to journalism?

I find myself at a crossroads today. As a loyal reader of The Chicago Tribune for some 30 years, and as a professional journalist, I'm afraid I actually may have to cancel my subscription. The Tribune used to be, and proudly proclaimed itself so on its once mighty flag, "The World's Greatest Newspaper." That, for me, at least, no longer is the case. Today's front page — let me reiterate, FRONT PAGE — the most important page, carried above the fold a most unimportant story about the Illinois Lottery lady, Linda Kollmeyer, and her so-called "Lindaisms?"

This is what the Tribune has become? Is this what journalism has become? Fluff on the front page? When cities and villages and towns across the state are flooding and residents are crying out for help from their local and county governments to repair, to replace decades-old drainage infrastructure that does little now but...well, does little but increase flooding in many areas now? With scandal now seemingly a constant in state governments, with President Obama desperately trying to turn around the economy, we readers are treated to little more than teasers and advertisements on the front page of major metropolitan newspapers and little more than press releases in our so-called local newspapers? When news of the President of the United States is relegated to quick tidbits on Page 3 (another once sacred news page), shared with a story about how quilting can be edgy, and to left-hand pages once reserved for jumps (the continuation of articles)...is this is what journalism has become?

Have we as readers really caused this blatant dumbing down of newspapers? Is this really what our newspapers should be giving us with our morning coffee? Are our attention-spans so short now that all we can tolerate are little stories with really big pictures and graphics? How can we find out what's really going on in the world around us if so few are willing to invest in real reporting? The Tribune's flag now boasts "The Midwest's largest reporting team." Really? So, what. If you aren't going to use that team to report the news in the Midwest, what good is having the largest team in the Midwest?

There always has been a fine line between giving the readers what they want and what they need to know. But these days, all too often, newspapers in general are light on the things we need to know about, such as how President Obama's new education overhaul really affect us, how will the once bi-partisan funding bill affect you, how will it affect your neighbors? Your parents? Your children? Time was, newspapers used to report that kind of thing. Reporters used to ask the question, "How will this affect the everyday Joe?" Do we not do that any more? Do we not do that enough?

Are we as journalists to blame? Are we no longer asking the right questions? Does anyone even know what the right questions are anymore? In a time when there is less and less room for news because advertising revenues are down and, when there are ads, they take up three-quarters of a page, perhaps few of us journalists see fit to ask how this action or that motion or that new ordinance will affect the everyday newspaper reader. Do we quietly think to ourselves, why bother? So few papers print longer stories today, maybe there's just no room to satisfy all of the questions who, what, where, when, why and how? And that most important question of "How will it actually affect Joe or Jane Doe?"

Maybe it's time reporters take back journalism. Maybe it's time for journalists to take back newspapers. So many newspapers now are owned by conglomerates headed by bean-counters, by bottom-liners, by mega-moguls who admit they have little to no idea what journalism is, or was, all about. Why is that? And what does it mean for the future of our newspapers? What does it mean for our so-called "local" newspapers that today cover "news" no more local than two, three or four towns over, unless all you really want to read is the police blotter. Local newspapers are closing left and right. Why? Because mom-and-pop newspapers can't afford to keep on good reporters and because they can't afford to offend or scare off certain advertisers by printing in-depth or investigative pieces. Mom-and-pop newspapers are hurting because they can't afford the space to answer all the questions because the advertising revenue isn't there to support what's called the news hole. I say, it's a slippery slope we journalists are on. How do we as reporters take on newspapers' new owners? Can we? Dare we try? Would it matter?

If the readers don't care, if the readers are satisfied with softer news, if the readers are content with not learning how the actions of our leaders, of world leaders, will affect them, maybe all of this is moot. Could well be I'm totally off base. Maybe readers really don't care that the goings-on of the White House, that stories about terror suspects and stories about the expansion of Al Qaida are falling farther and farther to the back of the newspapers. Maybe readers really do want more stories about how quilting can be edgy.

If that is the case, then I am truly saddened. I started reading the newspaper because it was full of interesting information about what was going on in my town, about what my local, state and national governmental officials were doing and how it would affect my family and my neighbors. I continue to write for newspapers because I want to be a reporter who reports the news and how it will affect, as one wise scribe once said, "the guy in the green pick-up truck." That could be you driving that pick-up. Could it really be true that trends in quilting are more important to most readers than the latest developments in cancer research or where the U.S. is in hunting down Osama bin laden or what's happening in Afghanistan or how Secretary of State Hillary Clinton is doing in her new position?

If so, perhaps newspapers really are doomed. And if that's true, maybe we all are. After all, newspapers have been the cornerstones of so many of our lives for so long. Newspapers have chronicled everything from the "shot heard around the world" to the killings of our national heroes to the election of the first African American president. What if—just think about it—what if, newspapers stopped reporting the news?

-30-

Copyright Bulldog News Services 03/2009. All rights reserved.