Stop! Please, everyone who is e-mailing me about the memo leaked out of the Morning News, stop asking about it. Someone at the paper was kind enough to pass it along to me, too. Yes, I find it odd that most top-level editors are now reporting to salespeople. But I’m an editor. What would you expect me to say? And, too, my boss is Wick Allison, who knows a thing or two about selling a thing or two.
I didn’t post anything about it till now because, frankly, I didn’t have the vinegar in me to do it. I’ve kicked the DMN so many times for making what look to me like boneheaded decisions that I’ve pulled a quadriceps. I need ice and rest. And hopefully that ice will be bobbing in bourbon, because that’s the only way I think any of us in the media are going to make it through these trying times.
(NB: I reserve the right tomorrow, after I’ve had more sleep, to change my attitude and kick the ever-living crap out of the paper. Thank you.)
20 comments
“Real Estate Segment: Bill Bradley will assume the role of acting GM for Real Estate until the permanent position is hired.”
Interesting…
A unique excuse for getting scooped. Points for style.
So does this move by DMN put them in closer competition with D Publishing? The business models seem more similar.
This post is an example of why I don’t read FB as much as I used to. And this attitude, not the hiatus of comments, probably plays a part in FB’s decreased traffic.
@ranch hand: Will you explain a little further what you mean? What did you find off-putting about this post? What’s the attitude you’re not a fan of?
These are sincere questions.
(And our traffic correlates very strongly with our travails in the comments arena.)
Your tone is arrogant and contemptuous of your readers.
Has traffic gone down on DMN? Why yes since the comments have been turned on I’ve personally noticed far fewer posts by the obviously drunk than before. Poem working.
And that on line re-subscribe note I’ve received – the relief of a woman (wearing pearls no less) that has a huge hole cut out of her head with the tag line “coming back to the Dallas Morning News is really a no brainer” is INSULTING. Like run-away-insulting.
What would be better? A woman (wearing pearls no less) who has a whole circling halo of smart ideas (current events, politics, history) that come from reading the DMN. THAT’s what I’m talking about.
Regardless of The Observer’s scoop, I was hoping to read a vigorous finger waving from Wick that his publications would not and will not mix editorial decisions with sales decisions.
Jeeze, why not just admit that you got scooped? This would have also been a good opportunity for you to address what someone on the Observer’s blog accused D of: Doing the same thing that the DMN is now doing.
@Greetingsfromfw: So I now have to answer to the commenters on Unfair Park? Please don’t make me do that. (But for the record, our wall between church and state remains in good repair.)
@ranch hand: My apologies. I’ll cop to arrogance every once in a while, but our readers are some of the most literate, informed people in Dallas. I love em.
>our wall between church and state
Isn’t it more of a one-way mirror? What DMN is doing sounds like a more general version of D’s bread-and-butter Best Of strategy [as you've explained it on here before] – write up content and then pummel nominees/vendors for “relevant” advertising dollars? Running these issues *is* mixing editorial with sales, albeit in a linear fashion. No?
@matt: “More general” feels to me like the problem. We’re very clear about, for instance, how we handle our Best Docs feature every year. Generating the list is an editorial undertaking. Doctors vote for their peers. The list is vetted by a panel. I oversee that process without interference from sales. Once the list is finalized, I hand it over to sales, and winning doctors are asked if they’d like to buy an ad. Whether they do or not has no bearing on the list. The ads do not appear near the list in the magazine, and the ads are labeled “special advertising section.”
That’s the process. Again, we take pains to be transparent about how it works.
One can only hope that the DMN will be as transparent.
IN MY OPINION…. D Magazine wrote the manual on Editorial and Advertising sleeping together. Long before Tim was an editor. Buy an ad, win a prize.
@BenD: And with that you raise my hackles, sir. I challenge you to cite an example of this. Because it doesn’t happen. This magazine does not give editorial coverage in exchange for advertising. You buy an ad, you get our audience. Nothing more. (And nothing less.)
So how do you come to your opinion?
Don’t worry about it Tim. I just like raising your hackles.
I thought that sales and editorial weren’t supposed to talk, period. Creating editorial content with a partial end goal being to sell ads based very specifically on said content seems, to me, to be walking a fine ethical line. I’m not sure if it matters that you’re transparent about it, or not… that said, you gotta make money somehow, right? And hopefully you guys are too cool to still use memos.
Hm. I find the lack of outrage at this particular DMN move very intriguing. I also think some readers aren’t aware that there was ever a barrier between news and advertising (and, I hasten to add, still is at many papers, including the one I work for). Note the NYT version this morning quotes Bob Mong as directing editors to fight for their ethics while reporting to advertising. I’m not sure you can have it both ways, but I’m certain the rest of the nation’s newspaper industry is going to watch with great interest to see how it plays out.
I used to work in advertising sales for the beloved Dallas Times Herald. I remember how the reporters (including our former mayor) used to look down on us. Now, we’ve won!
Reporters, take it and like it!
this outta work reporter really doesn’t want to take it, fred, and i sure as hell ain’t gonna like it
but congrats, man, yous won…you killed the newspaper…go revel in your spoils