I appreciate these smart, interesting, clear takes. They help me understand stuff about the biz that's above my pay grade. Thanks for keeping them coming! I hope Bezos listens to you!
Agree and…what I think the post needs just as much as money is MISSION. What “is” the Washington Post and what does it aspire to be? National paper? Local paper? Capitol Hill/government paper? Lifestyle company (I would argue this is what the NYT decided its mission is, and thus followed the various acquisitions and innovations)? And finally, I thought I sort of understood (though was skeptical about) this “third newsroom” concept until I saw this: https://www.washingtonpost.com/pr/2024/07/08/krissah-thompson-will-run-newsroom-process-building-third-newsroom/
Maybe I am misunderstanding what it means to be the ME for DEI, but it’s hard for me to grasp why anybody in that role — which, in my experience, is sort of a hybrid editorial/hr/ombuds role — would have the same skill set as somebody who is tasked with envisioning and launching what WaPo seems to be promoting as its very exciting new newsroom product for the future. How does one person wear both of these hats well? (No shade intended towards the individual, I am just puzzled by this org chart choice).
An Axel acquisition of the Post would be tres interessant, given it already owns Politico. Would it see that as too much mission overlap and not enough bang for the purchase buck? Possibly. Or maybe, per Mr. Poole's comment, it would see that as a waste.
I think BI would be a more likely purchaser of those two.
You have hit the nail on the head. The Washington Post is anything but a reflection of the world we live. Its corporate culture is stuck in the past as is its journalism. What it needs are some leaders that are willing to drag it into the 21st century and hopefully Lewis and his gang of Fleet Street fighters will manage it. The decision to create a third newsroom is telling. This will be the section that will need to do the heavy lifting and bring the much needed turnaround for the Post. What it also tells me that the current other news groups are bureaucratic, stuck in the good ole days when print reigned supreme. It no longer does. The New York Times had the same issues but then it decided it needed to expand its journalistic horizons and offer subscribers material that fell outside the traditional norm of hard news. It worked. I subscribed to the Post for more than a year but then I stopped. I had enough of their endless political journalism navel gazing. Mind you the new management has a tough slog ahead - newsrooms I have found, working for years as a news consultant all over the world - hate change, hate innovation and have no compunction about letting the whole world know about it and the rest of the media in its coverage falls into the same trap. But then of course these naysayers can bray all they want about unnecessary changes but who cares - they are part of the problem, not the solution
The country does not need another national newspaper that ignores its local base. It needs more Boston Globes. And it has a large enough, wealthy enough metro area to support one.
Many of the Globe strategies are not fancy. Boston's two biggest industries are pharma and education. Pharma was a good target for a specialized pub and the Globe set up STAT.
I can easily imagine the Post with news bureau covering the specialized agencies to feed its own business pubs or to feed some of the thousands of existing business pubs that depend on threadbare freelancers to cover DC now. A national, Washington-focused business pub could also be a winner.
I am a DC native, longtime reader of the Post and a one-time employee of a Post subsidiary, and from my point of view there is a lot wrong with The Post that investment alone won't fix. There is the internal culture that has caused a lot of good talent to leave the paper, and a fair amount of good talent to not want to work there. It is no wonder, then, that the Post's daily editorial product is not consistently compelling. (Perhaps Exhibit No. 1 is that The Post could have kept Kevin Merida in the fold and named him executive editor.) The paper now more than ever treats the residents of the city in which it is published as an afterthought; the latest example is the proposal to offer a new "Local Plus" product that will ask subscribers to pay extra to get local news from their local newspaper—an idea that would get an executive consigned to the loony bin in any other market. The paper regularly misses opportunities to remain relevant to its local subscriber base when it covers national issues with local impact. And while even The New York Times produces its own version of what could be derisively called "click bait," the Post too often seems to flail in pursuing digital clicks at the cost of presenting a coherent editorial product. The fact that The Post, with a main newsroom within walking distance of both The White House and The Capitol, is frequently outflanked by Politico and Axios in insider political coverage is inexcusable. Finally, is there really no one in the Washington metro area, or even the entire United States, with the qualifications to run the newspaper, and so you have to reach across the ocean to England for a capable leader? We really, really need The Post to be a successful newspaper, both for its national and international accountability journalism and as a trusted source for what is happening in our local communities. I am happy to give Jeff Bezos credit where credit is due, but this is the time when he and his leadership team needs to really step up passionately and intelligently to right the ship with aggressive and compelling journalism, global perspective and deep connection to the Washington community.
Hi, Dick. Think you're right.
At least they are dealing with an owner who
is patient and unafraid of tough decisions.
Remember how long it took to get Amazon into the black.
I appreciate these smart, interesting, clear takes. They help me understand stuff about the biz that's above my pay grade. Thanks for keeping them coming! I hope Bezos listens to you!
Hardly above your pay grade, Paul. But very much appreciated
Excellent thoughts here, Dick. Thanks for sharing them. Hope the right people in DC are reading.
Agree and…what I think the post needs just as much as money is MISSION. What “is” the Washington Post and what does it aspire to be? National paper? Local paper? Capitol Hill/government paper? Lifestyle company (I would argue this is what the NYT decided its mission is, and thus followed the various acquisitions and innovations)? And finally, I thought I sort of understood (though was skeptical about) this “third newsroom” concept until I saw this: https://www.washingtonpost.com/pr/2024/07/08/krissah-thompson-will-run-newsroom-process-building-third-newsroom/
Maybe I am misunderstanding what it means to be the ME for DEI, but it’s hard for me to grasp why anybody in that role — which, in my experience, is sort of a hybrid editorial/hr/ombuds role — would have the same skill set as somebody who is tasked with envisioning and launching what WaPo seems to be promoting as its very exciting new newsroom product for the future. How does one person wear both of these hats well? (No shade intended towards the individual, I am just puzzled by this org chart choice).
An Axel acquisition of the Post would be tres interessant, given it already owns Politico. Would it see that as too much mission overlap and not enough bang for the purchase buck? Possibly. Or maybe, per Mr. Poole's comment, it would see that as a waste.
I think BI would be a more likely purchaser of those two.
You have hit the nail on the head. The Washington Post is anything but a reflection of the world we live. Its corporate culture is stuck in the past as is its journalism. What it needs are some leaders that are willing to drag it into the 21st century and hopefully Lewis and his gang of Fleet Street fighters will manage it. The decision to create a third newsroom is telling. This will be the section that will need to do the heavy lifting and bring the much needed turnaround for the Post. What it also tells me that the current other news groups are bureaucratic, stuck in the good ole days when print reigned supreme. It no longer does. The New York Times had the same issues but then it decided it needed to expand its journalistic horizons and offer subscribers material that fell outside the traditional norm of hard news. It worked. I subscribed to the Post for more than a year but then I stopped. I had enough of their endless political journalism navel gazing. Mind you the new management has a tough slog ahead - newsrooms I have found, working for years as a news consultant all over the world - hate change, hate innovation and have no compunction about letting the whole world know about it and the rest of the media in its coverage falls into the same trap. But then of course these naysayers can bray all they want about unnecessary changes but who cares - they are part of the problem, not the solution
The country does not need another national newspaper that ignores its local base. It needs more Boston Globes. And it has a large enough, wealthy enough metro area to support one.
Many of the Globe strategies are not fancy. Boston's two biggest industries are pharma and education. Pharma was a good target for a specialized pub and the Globe set up STAT.
I can easily imagine the Post with news bureau covering the specialized agencies to feed its own business pubs or to feed some of the thousands of existing business pubs that depend on threadbare freelancers to cover DC now. A national, Washington-focused business pub could also be a winner.
I hope Bezos listens as well.
I agree with Paul Bass overall.
I am a DC native, longtime reader of the Post and a one-time employee of a Post subsidiary, and from my point of view there is a lot wrong with The Post that investment alone won't fix. There is the internal culture that has caused a lot of good talent to leave the paper, and a fair amount of good talent to not want to work there. It is no wonder, then, that the Post's daily editorial product is not consistently compelling. (Perhaps Exhibit No. 1 is that The Post could have kept Kevin Merida in the fold and named him executive editor.) The paper now more than ever treats the residents of the city in which it is published as an afterthought; the latest example is the proposal to offer a new "Local Plus" product that will ask subscribers to pay extra to get local news from their local newspaper—an idea that would get an executive consigned to the loony bin in any other market. The paper regularly misses opportunities to remain relevant to its local subscriber base when it covers national issues with local impact. And while even The New York Times produces its own version of what could be derisively called "click bait," the Post too often seems to flail in pursuing digital clicks at the cost of presenting a coherent editorial product. The fact that The Post, with a main newsroom within walking distance of both The White House and The Capitol, is frequently outflanked by Politico and Axios in insider political coverage is inexcusable. Finally, is there really no one in the Washington metro area, or even the entire United States, with the qualifications to run the newspaper, and so you have to reach across the ocean to England for a capable leader? We really, really need The Post to be a successful newspaper, both for its national and international accountability journalism and as a trusted source for what is happening in our local communities. I am happy to give Jeff Bezos credit where credit is due, but this is the time when he and his leadership team needs to really step up passionately and intelligently to right the ship with aggressive and compelling journalism, global perspective and deep connection to the Washington community.