My Journey Into Journalism

Standing in line at Wharton County Junior College in 1964, a bespectacled professor was quizzing each incoming freshman about the choice of a major.  My only goal at the time was to spend as little time as possible in class.  Now I was supposed to select a career?  And before the first class?

My best friend stood ahead of me in the queue.  When he approached the professor, he uttered those now famous words, "I want to major in journalism."  Listening, I thought to myself.  Writing.  Hmmm. How hard could that be?  I had watched a chimpanzee bang on a typewriter in a movie.

That is how I wound up in journalism.  What began as a fanciful notion, soon turned into a passion for reporting on the news  My initial foray into my freshly minted major was as a writer for the college newspaper.  I soon received my first lesson about ethics and journalism.

After some investigation, I wrote a story about our dear college president, who was secretly assisting a local manufacturing plant break a strike by hiring students.  It was hush-hush but I uncovered a couple of students who volunteered to be whistle blowers.  Now they call them unnamed sources.

The day the story appeared in the college paper my journalism professor was hastily summoned to the office of the president.  The president ordered my dismissal.  This brave journalism professor balked.  He promised to have a stern talk with me about my obvious disregard for authority.

Somehow I survived the dust-up.  Soon after, opportunity knocked.  The publisher of the local Wharton newspaper had seen my writing and wished to meet.  I figured he wanted me to do obituaries because I had almost buried a college president with a single article.

To my surprise, he showed up for the meeting with a crude radio transmitter.  The publisher also owned the local radio station.  His play-by-play sports announcer had just quit.  And the junior college had a basketball game that evening.  Would I be interested?  Well, I was a journalism major.

After a 15-minute lecture on radio transmitting and on air broadcasting, I was ready for my first radio gig.  I ended up broadcasting basketball and baseball games.  That's when I learned not everything in life is preparation.  A lot of what happens is just sheer luck no one can foresee.

Two years later I was working in the Sports Information Department at East Texas State University, my next stop on my college career path.  I needed money to pay for college and I liked sports.  Perfect match.  Then I wound up being offered the job of editor of the college newspaper.

Trouble followed.  I turned one entire edition of the paper into a buzz saw against the student government.  I skewered the student body president, tagging him a pawn of the administration. The burly guy accosted me one day on campus and threatened to dismember my body, organ by organ.

Before long, I had a call from the Greenville Herald Banner, a daily newspaper located not far from Commerce.  Their sports editor had gotten drunk and fled town.  Would I consider being sports editor for the summer?  It seemed like fate kept nudging me on the shoulder.

One day the editor raced to my desk and told me to hotfoot it to a small town a few miles outside of Greenville where a horse had broken from its rider and was racing through downtown causing general havoc.  It sounded like a yawn to me, now a big time sports editor.

When I arrived, the police were trying to corral the horse.  The boy who owned the animal was trailing behind shouting, "Whoa, Dammit!" Turns out that was the horse's name. Dammit.  It was a reporter's dream.  The headline on the front page howled: "Boy Tells Horse: 'Whoa, Dammit."

The article won an Associated Press award for feature writing.  My career in journalism was galloping along.  After I graduated college, I landed a job with United Press International, a wire service news organization with far flung offices.  I was offered Little Rock, a global hotspot.

Newly wed, I drove into Arkansas in the summer of 1968.  Within weeks, race riots erupted in the city.  I was dispatched to the epicenter of the action.  I was phoning in my report from a pay booth when an angry mob of folks surrounded the cubicle.  My life of 21 years flashed before me.

I bolted from the pay phone booth and sprinted like Jesse Owens.  I never looked back as I darted for the National Guard contingent manning barricades nearby.  I practically collapsed into the arms of a guardsman.  When I glanced back, all I saw was darkness.  Journalism was a risky business.

A few years later, the Dallas Times Herald offered me a job on the city desk.  The Times Herald was locked in a circulation battle with The Dallas Morning News.  Competition was fierce and the Herald wanted some more firepower.  That would be me.  Mr. Firepower.

One day I decided to sneak into the newsroom early to write a story for the paper's afternoon edition.  The newsroom was empty, eerily silent except for the clattering of news wire machines.  I was absentmindedly checking a few headlines when suddenly my heart went thud, thud, thud.

The Associated Press carried a story about the shooting of four sheriff's deputies in Dallas County.  The incident had happened at 2 a.m. after The Morning News had already printed its final edition.  I glanced at my watch.  It was 4 a.m.  I raced for a telephone and called the news editor at home.

The editor began summoning a crew of reporters and photographers while I sped to the Sheriff's Office.  By noon, we had wrapped up the biggest story in Dallas in years.  The Times Herald published an expanded edition that arrived at homes that afternoon.  It was a stunning scoop.

For my Herculean efforts, I was awarded a $10 a week raise.  That was the beginning of the end of my journalism career.  We wanted to start a family and the key to journalism would never unlock financial security. I decided to switch careers, despite my love of writing and reporting.

I admit goosebumps rise on my arms every time I hear breaking news.  I want to be smack in the middle of the action.  But the news business turned out to be cheap, cruel and often ethically challenging. I discovered journalism was a business, not pure as the driven snow.

I am glad I divorced journalism when I did.  It depresses me now to watch a once proud profession wallow in mediocrity and disgrace.  But I survived journalism's alluring embrace with some great memories.  I will cling to those in my golden years like a warm blanket.   

Factoids That Your Can Use

The latest circulation numbers for the newspaper industry continue the death march toward certain bankruptcy. What makes it newsworthy is that the day is drawing nearer when newspapers will no doubt come to the altar of government subsidy to remain afloat. There simply is no other way for the industry to survive. If that sounds overly pessimistic, consider these numbers from the latest report by the Audit Bureau of Circulations, a non-profit organization that verifies circulation data. Overall, the industry lost 8.7 percent of its readers during the past six months. The litany of losers included the nation's largest newspapers. The San Francisco Chronicle's circulation fell 23 percent. The Washington Post declined 13 percent. The New York Times dipped 8.5 percent. The Chicago Tribune shed 9.7 percent. The Dallas Morning News plummeted 21.4 percent. These latest figures might not be so deflating if it wasn't for the fact that the circulation declines have piled one on top of another for years. Among the nation's largest newspapers, only The Wall Street Journal increased readership, registering a meager 0.5 percent gain. Meanwhile, the industry's top executives are pinning all their hopes for revival on economic recovery and online editions of their same tired, old product, while clinging to an outdated business model. It's a giant miscalculation that spells certain doom for a once thriving industry.

Dinosaur Newspapers Still Don't Get It

The dying newspaper industry is digging itself a deeper grave, pinning its fading hopes for survival on Apple's IPad. Many, like the dinosaur New York Times, are betting their future on the new gadget. However, like many maneuvers in recent decades, it won't save the industry from burial in the cemetery for businesses that failed to see the future.

There is no question the industry could use a savior. Readership has sunk to new lows. Advertising revenues have tanked. Layoffs are rampant. Many in the industry seem to believe once the economy improves, nirvana will arrive in the form of robust advertising revenues. Industry execs are in denial.

In a sign of how out of touch the execs are with reality, the industry has been practically giddy about what the IPad can do to revitalize their sagging fortunes. But a careful examination of their business model reveals some head-shaking assumptions that are simply out of touch with reality.

First and foremost, the industry has mis-analyzed its problems. Sure, the economy hasn't helped, but newspapers were fading before the recession. Once the economy improves, newspaper will see an uptick in advertising, but nothing like the heyday years. Newspapers just have lost too much ground to the Internet as an advertising medium that delivers not only eyeballs, but is more targeted. The economy's improvement will not change that fact.

The other trend working against newspapers is that more people are turning to the Internet for their news. If that wasn't bad enough, most news is free for the viewing. People have become used to getting their news whenever they want at no cost. Newspapers with their rigid deadlines cannot compete with that.

So what has been the newspaper industry's solution? Nearly every single news outlet has decided it will rush to the Internet with the same hackneyed newspaper format and charge for viewership. With the IPad, they will get a larger format, which offers opportunities for full color advertising. However, the industry isn't willing to change its content or format or business model. This is a prescription for utter failure.

Here are some points the industry should be addressing:

1. Newspapers must change their entire business model. One possible solution is to adopt the one used in the wireless industry. The carriers subsidize the phone in exchange for a contract that ties the customers for a defined period of time, so it can recoup the subsidy. The newspaper industry could offer a subsidized IPad or other reader device along with a subscription at a price point significantly below its printed newsstand cost. Expecting customers to buy their own media devices and then be willing to pay today's newsstand prices for the same content is unrealistic.

2. With so much free content on the Internet, why do newspapers expect consumers will now pay? It reminds me of what happened in the music industry, which fought tooth and nail to save the CD when everyone was downloading songs on the Internet. Finally, the industry came to its senses and allowed its music to be sold at bargain basement prices on the Internet. There was no way to save the CD price model. Newspapers must deliver more value than they do today, which means not only a lower price point, but richer, targeted content. They cannot continue dual operations--one print and the other on the Internet--and live another 10 years. Unless the industry kills off print, it will drive itself to bankruptcy. The industry argues: but what about those who still want print versions? Give them the option of owning a industry-subsidized reader, described above.

3. Newspapers are ruled today by print-heads. All they know is cranking up the presses and turning out news they believe people want. Consumers no longer want the industry to dictate the news they receive. That's why readership has dipped. The Internet has freed consumers to search for the news they want. What a novel concept! If newspapers want to remain viable, the industry needs to overhaul what "news" means. As newspapers flee to the Internet, the industry should give consumers the tools to design their own content. Let readers decide if they want sports or international news or social commentary or whatever. Newspapers can use computing power to deliver individually edited news to each subscriber. This will allow the industry to build a direct relationship with each customer. In addition, the industry could give consumers the option of receiving alerts on subjects or news they want. Putting a version of today's printed newspaper on the Internet is a loser. But it is all the print-headed execs know.

4. Newspapers have lost advertising revenue because it is not a targeted medium. Ads that might only appeal to high-income subscribers are right next to those aimed at cost-conscious consumers. The Internet not only offers the ability to target, but it has better measurement tools to let advertisers know their investment delivers consumers. Once newspapers adopt the Internet model, the industry needs to offer improved value for advertisers, using the computing tools available do deliver targeted demographics. Additionally, the industry cannot just run the same print version of an ad on the Internet. Ads must include video, for example, to take advantage of the medium.

I don't pretend to have all the answers to the industry's problems. However, I am certain of one thing. Without sweeping changes in their business model, newspapers will go the way of the dinosaur.