How many journalists does it take…
Cory Bergman August 27th, 2008
…to cover a convention? There are an estimated 15,000 journalists in Denver for the DNC. “(And) 7,500 aren’t doing much at all,” writes Justin Peters in Columbia Journalism Review. “Only a small number of reporters actually have a reason to be here.” From a business standpoint — which needs to be taken more seriously than ever in today’s economic times — sending thousands of people to cover the same thing just to have “presence” is overkill.
In fact, many local TV stations and newspapers have passed this time around due to budget concerns. Even WCCO in Minneapolis, the site of the upcoming RNC, didn’t send a reporter. “My company, and local media in general, have been talking about not going for the last 12 years, the last three conventions,” said WCCO’s chief political correspondent Pat Kessler. “I’ve been waiting for a long time for this shoe to drop, and now it has.” In fact, even Minneapolis’ online-only news site, MinnPost sent a reporter. And the Minneapolis NPR station sent an entire team. “They’re sending what, like 20 people?” Kessler says. “Is there such a thing as too much local coverage?”
In journalism’s new financial reality, yes there is, whether you like it or not.
5 Comments Add your own
1. Alyssa | August 28th, 2008 at 7:25 am
NPR’s On The Media asked the very same question. One of their guests suggested sending sportswriters to conventions, because they’re good at making news out of something that otherwise might not be very exciting.
2. Charles | August 28th, 2008 at 7:26 am
Considering very little is accomplished at conventions now, that it’s just a big platform for political speeches and talking points, the reason that the number of journalist is in the thousands to begin with is mind-numbing.
3. discreet_chaos | August 28th, 2008 at 1:59 pm
Charles - I realize that this may border onto the political, but isn’t it ironic that Denver could’ve come down to a suspenseful roll call vote, but the talking heads did everything possible to keep it from happening?
4. Tracy @ WSB | August 28th, 2008 at 2:08 pm
Online journalists might be uniquely suited to telling the tale of what local delegates are up to, seeing it through their eyes, but regarding conventional TV … it sounds reminiscent of a big gang-bang I field-produced 15 years ago, when Prez Billybob came to Portland for the Forest Summit. My then-employer, KOMO in Seattle, sent a bunch of us, but almost no one on the team actually got to be anywhere near the proceedings … we sat in the next room watching a multbox feed of what was being said. Could just as well have pulled it off a sat feed back in the Seattle newsroom. Of course, the interwebs barely existed back then, or else of course we would have been blogging … or trying to!
5. Dave Martin | August 30th, 2008 at 11:17 am
Cory,
What we have here is a significant problem of leadership. At a time when all media organizations are fighting to bring in revenue and when most CEOs are on their quarterly calls blaming the economy for their poor performance, it appears some of these same idiot CEOs are green lighting what is clearly wasteful spending. Those dollars could have and should have been more wisely invested. I’ll await the Pulitzer and Peabody boards to prove me wrong.
Leave a Comment
(Please keep URLs out of the comment body or the spam filter will block you.)Subscribe to the comments via RSS Feed