The Retch received many questions from readers about Zell the past few days: What's Zell doing with the pension? What's going on with the Employee Stock Ownership Program? Since we are all "partners," when do we get a say?
It got me thinking. These all sound like story ideas. And we are all journalists. So why not do what we do best and find answers to these questions?
Thus Project Z.
Sam Zell became an important public figure in Southern California when he bought the LA Times, a major institution in the public sphere. He became a target for inquiry when he began driving this institution to ruin.
Let's put him under the microscope, as we would any other politician or public figure who badly managed an important public trust. The Board of Supes and MLKJr. Hospital. Chuck Quackenbush and the insurance commission. President Bush and the war in Iraq. Let's get some answers.
I've collected the suggestions and organized as reporting projects, which I'll post here in the coming days. If you're a current or former LA Times journalist who has an interest, let me know. Then go make some phone calls and send out emails. Seek and you shall find. Then send the Retch what you've got, and I'll post it.
We want total transparency. No off the record sources. No anonymous conversations. Whatever gets posted has to be verifiable and able to be duplicated. The biggest catch is that reporters who volunteered to make calls would have to identify themselves as reporters, by name, seeking information for a news story. Their names will have to go on the story. You want a press card? I'll send you one, free of charge, for TellZell Publications.
I know such transparency makes it unlikely that reporters now employed at the newspaper will be able to do this. But I know of no other way to make the information bullet proof.
Basically, my hope is this. As we know from the -30- list, there are scores of highly skilled, recently unemployed former LA Times reporters out there. Some now work hard other jobs. But surely a few of you must be hankering for the Good Ole Days, when a hot tip and a sense of justice made the world bright.
You provide the reporting muscle, the transparency, the insight, all the talent that made you great journalists—what you have always done throughout your career. TellZell will give you the platform, modest as it may be.
We're not lawyers. We're not business executives. But we are journalists. We ask questions. We raise doubts. We hold truth to power. We can do this. Maybe it works, maybe it doesn't. But the Retch figures it's worth a try.
Project 1: What the hells is the ESOP? And why is tolerating bad business decisions?
Project 2: Did Sam Zell give his sister a sweetheart deal? And was the board informed?
Project 3: What's Sam Zell doing with our pension?
9 comments:
So YOU get to be anonymous then? Nice. Throw everyone else into the fire.
I know, i know. sounds hypocritical. that's why i think the phone calls have to be done by ex-LATimers, not current. it's hard to expect current employees to risk getting fired. but we can provide the platform
Are you aware, in all of the wailing and moaning about the demise of print journalism, of any journalist who has said that maybe something other than technology, changing reading habits, advertising, the Internet, Sam Zell, the price of newsprint, etc., might be to blame? Sure, these and other factors contribute to the sorry state of the profession today. But what about the general public's perception that journalists are not very trustworthy? For decades polls have placed journalists and politicians together at the bottom of the trust pile. But strangely, this doesn't get mentioned by journalists as they watch their futures go down the tube. Maybe this hubris is at least partly to blame? Perhaps the general public cares little about the demise of newspapers demise they perceive that there wasn't much worth saving to begin with?
OK, maybe this is bluntly-written, but don't let that become an excuse to avoid the discussion. Why is it that journalists seem to blame everyone and everything but themselves for the deplorable state of newspapers today?
Certainly journalists can be blamed for losing public trust. But would it be better to improve transparency? Or to cut the number of journalists? The solution is not in less information. It's in more.
If Retch wasn't anonymous there'd be NO way for him/her to get the inside info of the LAT the way Retch does.
It's as simple and complex as that. It's not like the Reader's Representative is going to investigate on anything the LAT does. We need a watchdog watching the watchdog.
From a student journalist to a professional one, thank you Retch! Anonymity ALL the way if that's what it takes.
By the way, must I point out that the previous commentators were anonymous as well? Hmm.
Check out Abrams and Michaels while you're at it. You're bound to find something there.
Of all the myriad of possible reasons posted above explaining the demise of newspapers, one is forgotten. I theorize that we have become a nation distracted to the point of blindness to reality by the inane and trivial, a theory at least partially proven by the overwhelming fascination with celebrities and entertainment. I would be willing to be that the # of people in America who can name the finalists of American Idol outnumbers by 10 to 1 those who can name three Supreme Court justices.
It's been said that every people gets the government they deserve. Maybe the media they deserve too.
I've long believed that the loss in circulation has had more to do with the do-not-call registry, which began in 2003.
Want proof? Take a look at these graphs of circulation drops. (Also note how redesigns of American newspapers generally fail.) Here's a look of the overall industry.
Dear Wondering:
Thanks for you insightful opinion. You make a fine point. Citizen journalists -- the average Joe Six-Tooth -- would be far better at digging into corruption at city hall, in the police department, in the White House. Forget the fact that journalists are trained professionals. The reason that people tend to rank journalists as untrustworthy is, in part, because of some bad seeds, but it has more to do with politicians and those under the microscope constantly throwing us under the bus because we are doing something right. Chicago's esteemed mayor, for example, is constantly bitching about the media scrutiny into his administration. Well, maybe that's because of all the shady dealings. And, no offense, ye of the high and mighty variety, but good luck breaking through into that steel fortress to get any story. That access comes from building -- egads! -- trust from inside sources looking for an outlet to spill the beans.
Post a Comment