There have been many odd things newspapers have done over
the past several years when addressing the changes in reader habits,
advertising and the bottom line. The most popular approach is to cut their way
to profits, hoping subscribers won’t notice the impact on quality.
The result has been significantly smaller staffs to cover
the news. And I have no doubt readers really do see the difference.
With all this focus on budget cutting, none seems as strange
when the Chicago Sun-Times decided
lay off their entire 25-member photography staff in one swoop. The reasoning
was news reporting is changing, with a greater focus on the Internet. In a
statement they said:
"The Sun-Times business is changing rapidly
and our audiences are consistently seeking more video content with their news.
We have made great progress in meeting this demand and are focused on
bolstering our reporting capabilities with video and other multimedia elements.
The Chicago Sun-Times continues to
evolve with our digitally savvy customers, and as a result, we have had to
restructure the way we manage multimedia, including photography, across the
network."
Maybe I have read too many of these company
statements, but does anyone really believe this is good for readers? So I have
decided to decode this statement on what it really means, just for COURIER
readers.
“The Sun-Times business is changing rapidly and we
need to cut costs immediately. Since our website design really doesn’t focus on
photography, we figure firing our entire photo staff is a win-win for us.
Reporters will now take pictures and video on iPhones in addition to writing.
We’re betting readers will look at our video and photography no matter how bad
it is. Our editors say this will hurt our writing too, but we know they are all
lucky to have jobs.”
I’m not against multitasking, but as someone who
has personally tried to take video and pictures on assignment, it’s really
difficult. Shooting video is a different way of thinking, and you are bound to
miss the “moment” that makes still images so compelling. I realize shooting
both will occur in certain situations, but throw in writing a story too, and
there’s a recipe for disaster. Or in the Sun-times case, a drop in quality in all
published content…in print and online.
This decision is also a result of how the Internet
has changed photojournalism. As our COURIER newspaper readers know, page design
is critical in the display of good photography. Editors take time to choose
only the best images from a shoot. During the layout process, the photos are
sized differently for greater emphasis on key images, and then mixed with
typography on the page. It’s a real art to do this well, and takes teamwork
from photographer, to editor, to designer.
Although with online slideshows you have no limits
on space, most websites will include so many photos from an event, the
repetition can almost be unbearable. Plus, when you include everything, nothing
is really emphasized for impact. The days of getting more clicks have replaced
the style of photo usage in Life magazine.
Don’t get me wrong, I look at online photo
slideshows all the time. But the nature of how photography is displayed online does
impact photojournalism and storytelling.
As for management at the Sun-Times? They could have just as easily trained part or all of the
photo staff to shoot video. Many newspapers already do that. This not only
would be a relief to the writing staff, but also would kept the integrity and
quality of their visuals at a much higher level.
Here’s hoping this decision doesn’t start a trend
in the newspaper industry.
No comments:
Post a Comment