Dan Froomkin’s five-point plan on how to reconnect with readers

By Dan FroomkinMay 29, 2009  /  8 a.m.  

[Here's the final part of Dan Froomkin's essay on the ills facing American newspapers, where he proposes a few answers. You can catch up on the entire essay here. —Josh]

So much of what we do, we do because it’s always been done that way. But here are a few examples of how writing for a new medium can encourage us to rethink things we do that make us seem boring and aloof.

Embrace transparency. Daily newspapers are notoriously non-transparent, an old habit that at least in part stems from our lack of space. We historically haven’t had the column inches to “waste” on an explanation of how we got a story, or what the problems were in reporting it, or to defend it once it’s attacked. We just “let the story speak for itself.” Space seems to have been at a particular premium in the corrections box. But the Internet both demands and facilitates transparency. We should be much more willing to admit errors and explain ourselves – with a guiding principle being that the more people understand how we operate, the more they will trust us.

Raise unanswered questions. The daily newspaper paradigm is all about reporting what we know. But sometimes, the most important things are the things we don’t know. I would like to see reporters routinely appended a list of important unanswered questions to their stories. Not only would that engage readers, but it might put more pressure on sources to divulge what they know.

Stop the stenography. Part of effectively calling the B.S. is not covering non-events. Some press conferences and public meetings don’t generate anything worth writing about. Conversely, sometimes the news is not what it initially appears to be. If a source tries to sell us some outrageous spin, perhaps that’s the story right there. Readers will thank us for our honestly.

More accountability journalism. Reporters should be doing watchdog stories on every beat, not just ones that have “investigative” in the title. Accountability journalism differentiates us and reminds readers online and off of why journalism deserves some of their attention every day.

Unleash our readers’ voices. In addition to collecting readers around our voices, we should make sure our readers can find theirs, too. And when they are saying something worthwhile, we should make sure our readers are heard, as well. To that end, we should move aggressively to adopt best practices in mass Internet participation. Our goal should be a system that allows good ideas, relevant personal stories, informed opinions and perhaps even consensus on some issues to bubble up to the surface – and even into our reportage.

In conclusion, if our newsrooms don’t change, our future is pretty bleak. It’s my hope that the answer is not smaller newsrooms, or reinvented newsrooms, but newsrooms where our dedicated and hard-working editors and reporters don’t hold back in the name of anachronism and inertia, but deliver their full value to the next generation of readers.

Photo by J.D. Lasica used under a Creative Commons license.

This entry was written by Dan Froomkin, posted on May 29, 2009 at 8:00 am, and tagged , , , , , , , . Bookmark the permalink. Follow any comments here with the RSS feed for this post. Post a comment or leave a trackback.


5 comments:

  1. Ruxandra Guidi at 3:11 pm, May 29, 2009

    Thank you, Dan Froomkin! Very well said. Out of all the current industry insights, critiques and doomsday predictions, your take is the most thoughtful and honest. I would add that editors and journalists ought to step away more often from the breaking news cycle and make room for stories about real people and real places — not just pundits and places of conflict.

     
  2. martin jones at 10:08 am, May 31, 2009

    I have been advocating this kind of journalism for five years in Oxnard Ca.
    The most important stories never see print.
    For instance what are the ramifications to the taxpayer when a city manager or his appointed city employee in California (Oxnard) can sign contracts and change orders without taking it to the council for approval?
    If deals like these are not taken to the council the public is unaware of exorbitant spending for contracting friends of the council.
    No transparency and accountability.
    What is the role of the 4th estate?

     
  3. Martha Sterling-Golden at 5:09 pm, June 18, 2009

    On September 11, 2001, we lost more than the 3,000 lives at the World Trade Centers. That day marks the beginning of the end of real journalism in America. A nation without a free and fair press is in more trouble than it knows, and that is too true of us.

    It’s a sad day in the US when all the best writing published is now being outsourced to the UK papers and the blogosphere.

    Dan, your faithful Froomkettes will follow wherever you write. Screw the WaPo; their credibility is shot anyway.
    Best wishes from Maine.

     
  4. Bill Michtom at 10:35 pm, June 18, 2009

    Having been directed here by Digby (only knew your work in the Post), it is all too clear why they fired you.

    Dan! STOP MAKING SENSE!

    The Post will sink into the concrete that sets them in their stenographic ways. And good riddance to Hiatt, Will, Broder, Krauthammer and the rest of the drones.

    You are part of the present and future. They are past.

    I look forward to continuing to read real journalism–as you propose in this series and as you practice.

     

Trackbacks:

  1. O futuro das notícias, segundo Dan Froomkin : Ponto Media at 10:20 am, May 29, 2009

    [...] DAN FROOMKIN escreveu um interessante ensaio sobre o futuro das notícias, que termina com este five-point plan on how to reconnect with readers. [...]

     

Leave a comment

Check out these related posts