All Hands On Deck: 4 Editors on the SF Chronicle Implosion

by The Daily Anchor Editorial Team

Fridays hold a very special place in our hearts, so in honor of our 3rd favorite day of the week we’re going to shake things up a little…

From now on, every Friday on some Fridays all 4 Daily Anchor editors will weigh-in on a recent development, event or trend. Our aim is to give you 4 unique perspectives and a break from the standard one-editor/one-opinion formula of the blogosphere.

This Week’s Topic:

Hearst Threatens to End the San Francisco Chronicle, as reported by the New York Times on Tuesday, February 24th.

Note: All 4 Daily Anchor Editors live and work in San Francisco, and we wrote the following pieces prior to learning each other’s perspective on the issue.

Update: September 2, 2009: The SF Chronicle is now charging $99/yr for access to it’s “electronic edition.” I smell blood in the water. RIP San Francisco Chronicle.

Key Takeaways from the Article:

1. Hearst will close or sell the SF Chronicle unless it can draw concessions from its unions and significantly reduce the number of its unionized and non-union employees
2. Hearst says The Chronicle has posted significant loses every year since 2001, and has lost more than $50 million in 2008 and will lose more in 2009
3. If the changes aren’t made, Hearst will quickly seek a buyer for The Chronicle or, should a buyer not be found, shut the paper down
4. Since 2006, newspaper advertising revenue has plunged nationwide, and more so in California. The Chronicle has made deep cuts, signed a contract to outsource printing and explored selling its building

Mike Vicchitto | Editor

Gavin Newsom, the San Francisco mayor, warned of the consequences of its closure. “The Chronicle plays an important role in our civic life and we don’t want to see this treasured institution close its doors,” he said.

At what point does nostalgia need to face economic realities? If The Chronicle is such an integral part of daily life in San Francisco, why isn’t it a profitable business? If it isn’t profitable, then why isn’t it kept afloat by investors? It may seem cold, especially coming from an English major who values the printed word, but if market forces are changing the way we receive media, then the market must adapt and evolve. Traditional does not always mean better; I for one haven’t picked up a newspaper on a daily basis in about 6 years, but I read the news every day. Honestly, what are the advantages to print newspapers? An unbelievable waste of paper – it’s DAILY for pete’s sake – it’s got a shorter shelf life than US! Weekly. I can get my fix of Dear Abby online these days. The syndicated comics are atrociously un-funny compared to 10-15 years ago when I was an avid reader of Calvin & Hobbes, Foxtrot, and The Far Side. All the valuable content is available for quick browsing, in color, bookmark-able, email-able, where I can search, comment on and interact with the news that shapes my daily life. Let’s face it – the daily paper as we know it is dead.

Ella Keeven | Editor

It is definitely a scary time when something as big as the Chronicle is in fear of closing. Hearst only bought the paper in 2000 and it has not made a profit since 2001, so Hearst is not that attached to this publication. I think all of this publicity is a cry for help and a way for Hearst to rope in the unions and get what they want. The weird thing is that San Franciscans are very community-centric and closing the Chronicle would leave the City without a major newspaper (The Examiner, also formerly owned by Hearst, is kind of a joke). But part of me thinks locals wouldn’t really care if it was gone. Yay? Nay? There is obviously a nostalgia attached to the newspaper but I don’t think that is enough. The Chronicle would be better off for selling. But would anyone buy? There is a lot of potential for a newspaper with a big name and I think it would have an up on other newspapers that are currently for sale (Rocky Mountain News in Denver and the San Diego Union-Tribune).  Whomever were to take it on, could come in with a fresh perspective. It’s not like it is the most compelling newspaper I’ve read and it could use a boost.  This obviously goes much deeper than the “people read their news online” excuse. The Chronicle is not an innovator and don’t do much of their own reporting. So, while I wonder if people really care if the Chronicle goes, I also think that if it was sold, there is opportunity for a successful publication.

Rebecca Novack | Editor

I am out of the norm. I love holding the physical newspaper or magazine when reading them. Sure, I can live without the “page jumping” to complete an article, but overall I will never lose the enjoyment of holding the physical paper and turning the pages as I absorb my news and sip a cup of joe. I understand the luxury and fluidity of reading news online, because you can jump from article to article without leafing A through F sections and jumping from A2 to B4 to finish an article.

Newspapers, though, are going nowhere but downhill. Whether I like it or not, this is the progression of media and our society. I am all for progress in technology and making information more accessible for less money. So what are my feelings on the issue – close down The San Francisco Chronicle. I prefer to read the NY Times or Wall Street Journal. For the amount of time I spend reading The Chronicle I could have learned the same information and much more by reading a few local blogs and then hitting up NYTimes.com. I am consistently unfulfilled when I read the SF Chronicle. I am always left craving more facts, more information, and miss out on the quality of writing from better news outlets. More often than not I whet my palette on the SF Chronicle and spend the next 15 minutes finding a reliable source to fill in the gaps.

Bottom Line: Get rid of it! Hearst needs the money, really needs the money. They have already tarnished the brand by holding “fire sales” for advertisers month after month. Where is the value? Just because an ugly purple shirt with pink pom-poms is on sale for $1.00 doesn’t mean it is going to look good. Sometimes advertisers are so egocentric that they just need to advertise and take whatever is on sale at the time. Result?  Terrible marketing initiatives, cheap creative work, no response, and no ROI. What was the point? You would have better luck just buying a bottle of Jack and talking to random strangers on the street about your business, especially if you bring extra cups.

Herb Caen isn’t there anymore and neither is the real “Ask Alice.” What are we waiting for? Save the energy bill, lay off the fat cats that are still working as though it is the same days as “Glenn Gary, Glenn Ross,” and let’s embrace the new times. Put The Chronicle out of its misery and us out of our misery – put them to sleep!

Andrew Lennon | Editor-in-Chief

Print is dead. Hearst should take The Chronicle off life support. If Hearst is losing $50 million a year on the paper, why in God’s name wouldn’t they pull the plug? What’s the alternative? Should the government include print newspapers in the bailout? It’s bad enough that The Big 3 are receiving our tax dollars to pay for the consequences of making crappy cars for 35 years. I’d like to dig a hole big enough for them all.

If I want to deliver The Daily Anchor to your doorstep, all I need to do is ask you to enter your email address here or subscribe to the RSS and you’d get the newest articles every day… instantly. No paper is consumed, no ink is used, no presses run, and no trucks make deliveries, and it doesn’t leave ink stains on your bathrobe. Newspapers are limited. Static. Outdated the second they’re printed. Websites and blogs can publish articles in real-time, 24 hours a day, 7 days a week, and be updated on the fly, even from a cell phone.

In January the phone company delivered stacks of phone books to every house and apartment building in San Francisco, just as phone companies did throughout the rest of country. On Polk Street, the average stack contained 7-10 phone books, and over a period of four weeks I watched those stacks sit undisturbed on stoops – not a single one was brought inside, except by the sweet elderly lady across the street – until they were eventually picked up by Golden Gate Waste and Disposal. Think of all the wasted paper! It’s almost as bad as the several copies of the free San Francisco Examiner that collect on our stoop every morning, never to be read. Phone books and print newspapers are of the same vein: they once provided supreme value, but have since been cast into insignificance by the Internet.

The bottom line: A couple behemoths may survive for posterity’s sake, but I would wager that within the next 10 years, 85% of all print newspapers in operation today will be out of business or exclusively online. And you know what? They should go out of business. They’re dinosaurs, and the web is a meteorite/volcano/climate change/the best thing that’s happened since sliced bread. When did bread first start being sliced, anyway? Hmm, let me Google that.

The Top 5 Uses for the San Francisco Chronicle:

1. As kindling for your fireplace
2. For house-training puppies
3. As packing material
4. As a fly swatter (when rolled)
5. For teaching a history lesson

Conclusion

I expected at least one of us to rally behind The Chronicle, but given that the four of us are of the Millennial generation I can’t say I’m surprised. The San Francisco Chronicle should fold, along with most every other print newspaper. The End.

What do YOU think?

Tagged as: All Hands on Deck, Hearst, Newspapers, San Francisco Chronicle