Brendya Onelia Cole
Richard Roy
Robert H. Hubbard III
Stephen John Rechner
Stephen Frederick Brophy
Alan J. Carpenter
Robert G. Gray
Glenn B. MacDonald
Henry F. Collins
Thomas Freyn Dunn
Gary B. Balser
Ann M. Kaplan
James E. Pashby
Alyce C. Putnam
Don “Donnie” Samuelson
Carlton L. Smith
JoAnn Fitzpatrick
Dianne M. Ryan-Paschall
Matthew Richard Fish
JoAnn Fitzpatrick
Betty L. Stevenson
The Journalism Education Foundation of New England, a division of the New England Newspaper & Press Association, has announced the recipients of their 2019 scholarships. This year, $2,000 scholarships will be awarded to four collegiate students and one high school student: Jenna Ciccotelli, Methuen, MA; Alexandre Silberman, Burlington, VT; Sarah Asch, Middlebury, VT; Allison Marianna Cross, Monroe, CT; and Hailey Bryant, Orono, ME.
The Journalism Education Foundation of New England encourages and supports high school seniors and college students in the six-state region who aspire to pursue a career in journalism.
The JEFNE scholarship is available to residents of New England. Applicants must be a college student or high school senior planning to attend college the following year to study journalism or a related field.
Member newspapers of the New England Newspaper & Press Association joined in sponsoring the competition for these scholarships by promoting the program in their newspapers.
For more information about the JEFNE scholarship program, please contact Linda Conway at l.conway@nenpa.com.
Each fall the New England Newspaper and Press Association recognizes extraordinary journalists and newspapers throughout New England.
The annual New England Newspaper of the Year awards luncheon honors the very best newspapers in the region as well as the recipients of NENPA’s annual Publick Occurrences awards, the New England First Amendment Award, the Allan B. Rogers Editorial Award, the AP Sevellon Brown Journalist of the Year Award, and the Bob Wallack Community Journalism Award.
NENPA members are invited to submit entries for these prestigious awards. The deadline to submit entries is July 18, 2019. Entries must be in the NENPA office by 4pm.
For more information please contact Christine Panek at c.panek@nenpa.com. The winners will be honored at the New England Newspaper Conference, which will be held on Thursday October 10, 2019 at the AC Hotel Marriott, in Worcester, MA (a new location this year).
The New England Society of News Editors, New England Newspaper & Press
Association, and The Associated Press strongly condemn the arrest of Tara
O’Neill, a Hearst Connecticut Media reporter, while reporting on a public event in
Bridgeport, Conn., Thursday. The organizations also support the May 10 letter sent
by the New England First Amendment Coalition to Bridgeport Police and the
mayor calling her arrest inexcusable.
NESNE, NENPA and the AP also support the steps that NEFAC proposed in its
May 10 letter to Bridgeport Police Chief Armando Perez and Mayor Joseph
Ganim, calling on the police department to present a full public explanation of the
events leading to O’Neill’s arrest and to issue a formal apology, among other steps.
“There is simply no excuse for a journalist to be arrested for doing her job,”
NEFAC’s letter said.
O’Neill was arrested on Thursday while covering a public demonstration for the
second anniversary of an officer-involved shooting in the death of a 15-year-old
resident. O’Neill tweeted footage of her arrest by police, and on Twitter described
being handcuffed, put into a police cruiser, and taken to the police station for
booking.
“NESNE’s board members are united in their belief in the need for press freedom,
and concerned how the arrest of any reporter covering a story undermines it,” said
NESNE president Paula Bouknight.
Signed,
The New England Society of News Editors
New England Newspaper & Press Association
The Associated Press
Whether writers realize it or not, we hear voices in our heads.
And often, listening to them is a sensible thing to do and not a symptom of insanity.
I speak not of voices of ghosts or those generated by an overactive psyche.
Rather, they are the voices of respected editors, colleagues, friends and family members whose opinions we value highly and whose input we can draw upon without being in their presence or sharing a single spoken word.
Listening to those internal voices almost always improves your reporting, writing, storytelling and general performance on the job. I am hopeful that in 30 years of reporting and editing I have touched a few journalists in ways that help them be more effective in their work.
I know for sure that my voice still resonates with at least one former colleague, even if only in a mostly humorous way.
About 18 months ago, I embarked on research on non-profit news organizations to prepare for a job interview for South Dakota News Watch, the non-profit, public-service news service that eventually hired me. I decided to call Halle Stockton, the managing editor of PublicSource, a nonprofit in Pennsylvania, whom I had edited when we were both in Florida. Halle is a rising star in journalism and I was fortunate to work with her.
After we spoke for an hour or so, she mentioned that to this day, more than seven years since we worked together, she still thinks of a phrase I often repeated to encourage reporters to be efficient in their daily duties to create more time to focus on the craft of journalism. I called it being high on the “Sh!#-togetherness Scale,” a made-up measure of functioning at a high level. I laughed when she shared how she still occasionally recalls that phrase, but I also felt a small tinge of pride that I made an impact on her work habits all those years ago.
For myself, the voice I hear most often is that of my wife, Dawn, a highly intelligent, critical thinker who carries a wide-open view of the world and all its problems, peculiarities and possibilities. When writing a long piece, I think to myself: “What would Dawn want to know next?” It helps me keep the piece popping along with facts.
I also think often of her father, Miles, a voracious consumer of news who was a teacher but is a farmer at heart. As a reader, Miles feeds on context – how news/life/trends/problems in one state or region compare to another. His voice prompts me to pursue sources from other states or regions or groups of people in order to provide that comparison and contrast.
Another prominent voice is that of Jim Stasiowski, a learned retired journalist who is a skilled wordsmith, though he may chafe at such a haughty title. “Staz” is a stickler for style, word usage, grammar and clarity of meaning. I was lucky enough to spend the last two years of Staz’s career working closely with him at the daily paper in Rapid City. Thinking of him reminds me to read over my pieces one more time to seek ways to tighten copy, sharpen word usage or follow style guidelines.
When it comes to being fair and accurate in South Dakota, a number of voices chime in to encourage me to be careful when referencing the Rushmore State. My editor, Maricarrol Kueter, and a former reporting colleague, Seth Tupper, are both long-time, knowledgeable South Dakotans who speak to me when I address topics that relate to the state. I know that one misstep about state geography, place names, locations, directions, history or well-known figures would damage my own credibility but potentially, in a tangential way, theirs as well.
Voices from deep in my past also sometimes ring out. I still recall an editor who told me to always say what is, rather than what isn’t. I think of an editor who warned me off my tendency to bury the news beneath long narrative wind-ups. When a piece sometimes falls short of expectations, I cut myself some slack by remembering an editor who insisted that imperfect stories still have value, at least to some readers out there. I sometimes channel my very first editor who told me that adjectives and adverbs were for lazy writers who were unwilling to seek out colorful subjects and active verbs.
I’m sure we’ve all heard that we should write with readers in mind. Of course, that is true. Still, there’s nothing wrong with listening to the voices from our past that remind us to avoid bad habits and do great work.
I encourage all writers, and editors as well, to consider whose voice they hear when they prepare for an interview or sit down to write, and listen once again to their good advice. Rather than a cacophony, those voices can form a chorus of helpful wisdom that each of us can heed throughout the long journey of our career.
When I was growing up, my father had an old shortwave radio. Although he didn’t use it often, I enjoyed playing around with it. There were buttons to listen to different frequencies to find radio stations in North America and overseas.
It was a magical machine. I could hear people speaking in foreign languages. And when conditions were right, I could listen to the New York Yankees, my favorite baseball team. The strongest signal was usually WOWO – “1190 on your dial”– in Fort Wayne, Indiana, which broadcast a hockey team called the Fort Wayne Komets. Imagine the excitement of an eleven-year-old kid sitting in North Carolina, listening to a hockey game being played in a faraway place like Indiana.
The radio had two round knobs, one for volume and one for tuning. The tuning knob moved a red needle back and forth across the dial. As the needle approached a station, there was a lot of static and buzzing, but I learned how to hit the sweet spot by turning the knob ever so slightly.
I thought about that old radio recently – and the challenges of tuning in to a station – when I had a conversation with Karl, who manages an ad sales team. “A lot has been written and said about listening as a sales skill,” he said, “so we should all know the basic rules: listen actively, eliminate distractions, make eye contact, and so on. That’s why we go beyond those general rules in staff meetings and talk about the little things we can do to tune in to other people.
Karl said they’ve been focusing on three small adjustments that can improve in-the-moment listening: ask one question at a time, don’t interrupt and rephrase what the other person says. Let’s take a closer look:
1. Ask one question at a time. “Because sales people get revved up for appointments – and because they are conditioned to ask questions – there is a tendency to ask a string of questions without giving the other person enough time to answer thoroughly,” Karl said. “It’s important to ask a question, listen carefully, then move on to the next question.”
2. Don’t interrupt. “This one is a matter of manners. It’s a lot like asking too many questions at once. Not everyone formulates their thoughts at the same speed. While it doesn’t make sense to let the other person drone on and on, at least look for a stopping point before jumping in.”
Or move on to Karl’s next pointer and rephrase what they’re saying.
3. Rephrase. “This is a good way to stay focused. By restating what the other person says, you show respect and force yourself to pay attention and stay in step. Plus, when they hear their own ideas stated by another person, they’re likely think of something else that is important. That’s a big help.”
Yes, sales conversations have a lot in common with that old radio. Improve your listening skills, and your ideas will get better reception.
I was excited about the opportunity to speak to the publishers of New York recently at the NYPA Spring Convention. Let’s face it, New Yorkers take their newspapers seriously, and the NYPA convention is always special.
I spoke on eight topics over two days while in New York, but it was the second session that drew the biggest crowd. The room was packed to hear me speak on the topic, “What’s Really Happening at Newspapers Today.”
Fortunately, I was a week into crunching numbers from my 2019 survey of U.S. newspaper publishers. I quizzed the audience before sharing the results of the survey to see how they thought other publishers would respond to the survey’s 35 questions. On some, they were close. On others, they were audibly surprised.
We began conducting this annual survey in 2014, while I was directing the Newspaper Institute at The University of Tennessee. In each year since, we’ve had between 400 and 700 publishers participate. That’s easily enough to indicate results representative of the industry.
While with the New York group, I took some time to look at the differences between daily and non-daily papers. We examined the numbers of locally-owned newspapers to those owned by large groups. We even compared newspapers in New York state to papers in other geographical areas of the country.
In coming columns, I’ll share some of the most interesting details from these comparisons. In this column, I will share some general results of the completed questionnaires.
Where are the participants located?
No surprise here. Most respondents came from the Southeast, Midwest and Northeast geographical areas of the U.S. It makes sense, since these are the areas with the most newspapers. These were followed by the Southwest, West Coast, and Pacific Northwest.
I always get a chuckle out of this question. There will always be a few publishers from Texas who select “other,” and insist Texas is its own geographical region.
How many copies are printed?
This one always seems to stump the audience. Most folks usually seem to think other papers are much larger than their own, so they will guess somewhere around 10,000. Then when I ask how big their papers are, they will usually come in around 3,000 to 5,000. Audience members always seem surprised to learn that most of their papers are like most other newspapers in the business.
How is the health of your newspaper?
When it comes to guessing the overall health of most newspapers, audience members usually guess correctly. Almost 45 percent of publishers in the survey responded their overall health as “Not bad, but not great.” That was followed by 36 percent who responded the health of their papers was “Relatively healthy.”
Only 10 percent oºf newspaper publishers indicated their papers are in “Poor health,” while less than one percent checked “Near death.”
Compared to one year ago, 52 percent of publishers indicate their papers are “About the same” health. 23 percent of papers seem to be in better shape than a year earlier, while 25 percent indicated they are in worse shape.
When compared to three years ago, the numbers aren’t quite as rosy. “Better than three years ago” was selected by 24 percent of respondents. “About the same” was the answer for 25 percent, and 49 percent indicated they are in worse shape than three years ago.
Where is the money coming from?
Most folks in the New York audience guessed correctly to the question, “What is the primary revenue source of you main publication?” They were, however, surprised by the low number of papers than answered something besides “Print Advertising.”
A full 95 percent of respondents answered “Print Advertising” when asked what was their primary revenue source. Another three percent indicated “Print Subscriptions,” while 3 percent answered either “Digital Advertising” (1.6 percent) or “Digital Subscriptions” (.3 percent).
It seems that digital is a long way from “the goose that laid the golden egg.” While many survey participants indicated they see some benefits from their digital presence, many are hard-pressed to find any financial benefits.
What’s the bottom line?
Well, I’m still crunching numbers but it’s safe to say this year’s survey looks a lot like the surveys from 2014-2018. There are fewer newspapers without a digital presence. Newspapers aren’t quite as optimistic about their long-term futures, but most think they will be around for a long time to come (12 years or longer) in printed form, though publishers aren’t as confident as they were in previous years.
What surprised attendees the most in New York? From their responses to the survey results, I’d guess they were surprised that their newspapers were so similar to other papers around the U.S.
Like in most geographical areas, the large majority of New York papers are locally-owned. New York has its share of big metro papers, but most newspapers are weekly/community publications. They’re not making the profits they were 30 years ago, but they are healthy and expect to continue in business for a long time to come.
When I began to call my session to an end, one of the audience members asked if I could share a little more information. I was surprised when other audience members indicated they’d like to learn more.
I continued to share some of what I’d learn visiting thousands of newspapers over the years and answering questions, while others shared their thoughts.
The truth is that I like just about every place I visit, and my few days in New York left me once again with the realization that our industry is in good shape. With spring convention season behind me, I suppose I’ll have to visit a few papers to keep my adrenaline flowing.
Defending all of us by defending a free press
Police raids in lieu of legal due process. Undercover surveillance on reporters because of their work. Street “sweeps” in which journalists are handcuffed and carted away to “headquarters.” The use of force as an alternative to courts and legal means.
Such are the tactics of dictators, despots and those for whom democratic ideals and the rule of law are expendable in the name of expediency, political gains or a desire to avoid being held accountable to the public.
Recent examples of these strong-arm methods have appeared here in our nation — and every citizen ought to hear his/her First Amendment threat alarm sounding.
Just days ago in California, San Francisco police raided the home and office of a freelance journalist, reportedly wielding sledgehammers and with guns drawn, in search of a leaked confidential police report. Journalist Bryan Carmody was handcuffed and reported taken to an area newsroom after a search of his home. News reports said, “officers seized computers, cell phones and other electronic devices.”
Carmody’s lawyer questioned why standard practice was not followed — that is, subpoenaing a journalist in search of such a document concerning the death of a public defender and long-time police critic. The lawyer noted that a subpoena would have allowed a judge time to consider more information, such as targeting a newsroom on specious evidence of a crime, before granting search warrants.
Hearst Connecticut Media reporter Tara O’Neill was arrested and briefly held in police custody May 9 while covering a demonstration against a 2017 police shooting. O’Neill, who Hearst officials said identified herself as a journalist and was well known to area police, was standing on a sidewalk as police shouting “Off the street” swept up protesters following a general order to clear the area. She was handcuffed, put in the back of a police car and taken to a police station. O’Neill was not charged.
On March 4, three reporters were arrested in Sacramento, Calif., as police began dispersing a group protesting a police shooting. A photojournalist in the same area was knocked to the ground by a police officer and his equipment damaged.
Documents obtained by a San Diego television station led to a March 6 report that the U.S. government has created a secret database and dossiers of journalists, along with activists and others, because of reporting and social media posts related to immigration issues. In some cases, the report said, alerts were placed on journalists’ passports and several reporters said they had been subjected to increased equipment inspections and questions by border authorities.
Granted, protest-related incidents could potentially be chalked up to momentary missteps in the heat of confusing, fluid situations. But then consider the atmospherics around all of these reports: A multi-group collaborative behind the U.S. Press Freedom Tracker website documents seven journalists arrested, 10 journalists attacked and six stopped at a border this year. Reporters Without Borders downgraded the U.S. three places, to number 48, on its annual World Press Freedom Index, noting that as of 2018 “never before have U.S. journalists been subjected to so many death threats or turned so often to private security firms for protection.”
I’d add one more observation about current conditions: Just a few years ago, it would have been unthinkable — and unnecessary — to even have a “U.S. Press Freedom Tracker.”
We should all be concerned when journalists — from news outlets we like and trust or from operations we don’t favor or find particularly credible — are prevented from representing us when and where news occurs. A diverse, unfettered news media (“the press” in the First Amendment’s words) was and should be seen as one of our best defenses against government excess or abuse — things that know no political tags.
Using force against a journalist doing his/her job is never acceptable. When police shut down a demonstration and include identifiable, working journalists in a “sweep,” they might cite public safety reasons, but as we have seen too many times in the past, it may be a means to blunt public accountability for their actions.
We have the rule of law and legal due process to avoid random actions by authorities, who must justify using the power of the state against any one of us, including journalists.
Just the other day, a social media post made an eloquent argument against targeting journalists by virtue of wordplay on an old saying: “First they came for the journalists…and we don’t know what happened after that.”
Defending a free press is, as our nation’s founders knew, also defending ourselves.