Guys, many of us have mentioned it before, and I have seen it time and time again - but I think now it is time to start a fresh thread about Oklahoma City's media, or lack thereof. But I want to preface everything by saying, let's make this constructive and point out things we LIKE from other markets or ways OKC can improve and not just focus on the faults.

The MAIN issues I have with OKC media stem from the Daily Oklahoman and their lack of content as well as their being way too slow to publish in most situations. At first, I thought there must be some reason for this - but I have seen far too many examples of much better press in other markets, and now I think it is time to have some corrective action in OKC.

For example. Tonight's game had OKC Thunder travel to Portland Trailblazers, a division foe and along with OKC, one of the top markee players in Brandon Roy not to mention the injured Odon. OKC won the game and the story was published almost immediately in the Portland Oregonian newspaper. http://www.oregonlive.com/blazers/index.ssf/2010/11/oklahoma_city_107_portland_106.html

Not only was it published less than 10 minutes after the game ended with OKC winning, but the storey was complete, full of facts and information about both teams and wasn't heavily slanted against OKC but also didn't 'diss' Portland. The storey in the Oregonian stated the facts of the game, and left plenty of areas for the locals to cheer or consult their team.

Now, take a look at the Oklahoman's coverage, 6 sentences and all of them are like rushed afterthoughts, like OKC's media didn't care or was too busy to write an article about THEIR winning team. http://newsok.com/durant-and-westbrook-lead-thunder-over-blazers/article/3511496?custom_click=pod_headline_sports

No scoop, no interviews, nothing. Just, OH, The Thunder won. But they had several articles BLASTING the Thunder the past few days. Again, little scoop - just reporter/editor opinion. All negative or bandwagony.

What about OKC's AFL team. Does anybody even know they won't play in the AFL anymore? if you do know, you found out AFTER the fact. The team received NO coverage in Newsok, even though TECHNICALLY they are a major league team. .. No wonder the team folded.

Another Example: It's not just sports though. The SkyDance Bridge story, it was published in the Oklahoman AFTER the city council already voted. And once again, that first article was a 4 or so sentencer with no information other than, the decision was made. WAS MADE!!!!! A day or two later, the Oklahoman had a much better storey published but again - it was LATE and the story didn't really offer anything we didn't already know, such as inside investigation or objective (even subjective) thoughts as to why the council voted the way they did. No interviews, no scoop - just, 'oh by the way, this happened on Tuesday. Council voted to downsize the SkyDance Bridge.' End of story. It almost appears as if there would NOT have been another complete article published about the SkyDance Bridge if it wasn't for the high degree of discussion on OKCTalk.

To me, this is unacceptable! You have arguably the HOTTEST team in the NBA, everybody is gunning for the Thunder - and yet the newspaper is always late, and is always incomplete with their coverage, unless it is BEAT writer Darnell Mayberry giving his take on the team. But even that seems to be watered down, with just HIS OPINION. No interviews, no scoop. You have a public works project, which if somebody in the press had published the story BEFORE the city council meeting - perhaps concerned citizens might have showed up or written their council members to express their position, potentially giving council something to think about.

Other articles published in the Oklahoman are very similar. Myriad Gardens' cafe, Urban Renewal meetings/decisions, election coverage, celebrities visiting the city, attractions or events going on in the city. Need I keep going? ....

Either one liner headlines published well after the fact OR editorial commentaries posing as the official scoop when it is really one of the reporters/editors of the Oklahoman printing THEIR VIEW, THEIR OPINION and passing it off as fact. Even Dallas Morning News and USA TODAY (in some cases, even Tulsa world) write better and more complete articles about things OKC, and published sooner.


OKC needs to stand up and demand better, or somebody needs to start another newspaper. This is horrible press in my opinion as even smaller cities 'like Wichita' has better content even though their city hardly has anything to write about.

I know there are good people at the paper, Steve is one, Darnell is another, Dave seems to be quite good, and there are others. But the paper in general is not run well, and this needs attention. We need big league press, with complete information (you know, with the background/scoop as well as interviews from pro and opposing positions). Publish the information, the facts, the scoop - and do it as soon as possible, particularly if WE on OKCTalk know about things ahead of time (you'd think so should the Oklahoman with all of their inside 'resources' reporters and investigators).

Sure, OKC's media has improved - in that at least now we actually GET stories. But it is a far cry from every peer city market and even most that are smaller. I know this probably is due to lack of competition and an Editor/Publishing Company who thinks they own or CONTROL Oklahoma City's thinking/position, but this has got to end and we must demand better. We deserve better.

Here is your chance to voice your opinion and/or concerns. Hopefully Steve and some of the reporters who frequent OKCTalk can bring some of these constructive yet (hopefully) humbling observations/suggestions/criticisms to the Daily Oklahoman and they can produce a better product.

Feel free to cite other OKC media sources too. I didn't because I am not local - I only can see the newsok coverage, you know - the self proclaimed "Oklahoma's most trusted news" source. ....

We deserve Better

Two thumbs up.

I won't reopen old wounds by repeating here what I've already said before during the Maps 3 campaign, but I certainly agree with what you said. While the Oklahoman does have some bright spots, such as Steve Lackmeyer, the editorial policy of the owners and managers can and does spill over into what its reporters are permitted to say and report on. It also employs some reporters, and I'm presently thinking of those who cover City Hall, that are simply mediocre either by choice or by command on what, when, and how, they do their job. The problems are pervasive and can be downright parochial. Did anyone but me notice the complete absence of reporting on the Ghouls Gone Wild parade on October 31 (the parade was on October 30) and following? Nada. Not gonna cover it because it was sponsored by the Gazette.

As a practical matter, however, having a paper-press daily alternative is not economically possible. Even in the days before the internet took away advertisers and speed of reporting from paper-press, Bill Atkinson learned after making a valiant effort and paper-press competition that the market was not large enough to support two full-fledged daily newspapers.

We are stuck with what we've got and the owners of the Oklahoman know it. It might be helpful if, along with its economic-type reports, Forbes published a "top 10" and "top bottom" list for metropolitan newspapers. Would it matter if it did? Probably not.

Just playing devil's advocate but it goes back to what is the role of the "Press"? Some would argue that it is just there to report the facts of what has already happened (who, what, where, when and why). Others say it should be an advocate and influence the news (getting people to show up at council meetings etc). Then there is investigative journalism (the watchdog) but then again, that is primarily after the fact reporting.

Larry, it would be nice if the press did all 3 roles.

It does in other markets, there are reports before, during and after with interviews from opposing sides and background/history as well as PROFESSIONAL or UNIVERSITY/RESEARCH statements. Why is OKC so different - getting only the facts, and the BARE and often slanted "facts" at that.

We need to demand more. All 3 roles filled; Report the Facts, Involve the Public, and Investigate - BEFORE there is Editorial.

Check out the Portland coverage of the OKC-PDX game last night; all stories published before, during, or within 2-3 hours of the game ending, the first story hit just 5 minutes afte the game, and it was COMPLETE. There likely will be several more stories written Friday. ... Impressive media coverage, of a loss.

http://www.oregonlive.com/blazers/index.ssf/2010/11/oklahoma_city_107_portland_106.html
http://www.oregonlive.com/blazers/index.ssf/2010/11/thunder_107_trail_blazers_106.html
http://www.oregonlive.com/blazers/index.ssf/2010/11/photos_trail_blazers_vs_thunde_1.html
http://www.oregonlive.com/blazers/index.ssf/2010/11/trail_blazers_vs_thunder_updat.html
http://www.oregonlive.com/blazers/index.ssf/2010/11/live_chat_oklahoma_city_thunde.html
http://www.oregonlive.com/blazers/index.ssf/2010/11/trail_blazers_game_preview_okl.html
http://blog.oregonlive.com/nba/2010/11/kevin_durant_oklahoma_citys_rising_star_keeps_his_ feet_firmly_grounded_in_humility.html

a REAL SportsPage/Scoreboard http://www.oregonlive.com/sports/

Oregonian is a great benchmark for the OKC/Oklahoman. ....

Well like so many things in media today, journalists no longer report. They want to be flashy and attract attention. Be it print, radio, or tv...it's all the same. New "journalists" lack what their forefathers had; the ability to report without editorializing. If you read the Oklahoman, that's mostly what you see....especially in the sports section. People like Jenni Carlson are perfect examples of everything that's wrong with journalism. I can't think of his name, but that red hed guy that at least used to be on Fox 25 was a good TV example. His tone of voice tries to make you "feel" the story. Let's not even talk about the weather personalities. I'm not going to call them meteorologists anymore. It's fundamental to the style of today...flash it, sensationalize it, and make as big of a stink you can about it.....ratings over content. Which is why i no longer pay for the paper, and hardly every watch the news. I'll stick to the AP/NPR/etc.

I seldom get out...anymore...but had to go to a Dr. appt. and some lab work in OKC Tuesday to sustain life...picked up an Oklahoman...and was appalled at the size of the thing--this dinky, quasi-tabloid bastard-sized thing...had no idea it had shrunk into this oddity. Media all over is in full revision the world over for a lot of reasons...but I couldn't even read the thing...the size was so repugnant. Not a standard size, not a tabloid, an abortion!

Too many reports chasing the next Pulitzer. Another factor is that the majority of the sheeple out here could care less about being informed they want to be entertianed.

The comments above pretty much summarize my thoughts on the Daily Joklahoman, and agree with Doug, we're pretty much stuck with it because of their good ole boy network. I enjoy an occasional read from Slackmeyer, but that's not enough to make me purchase a subscription when I can read it for free online or my mobile device (phone, iPad, etc.). I'm purchase a good amount of ads with them through my employer, so I make my contribution back to them that way.

My hope is that since newspapers are going all digital in the foreseeable future, and costs of doing business is next to nothing in the digital world, that someone or a group of someones such as OKCTalkers, have the fortitude and foresight to be able to go against the once almighty Joklahoman as the cost won't be a huge factor since Brick/Mortar and a printing press won't be necessary. OKC citizens deserve better with our media (Broadcast and Print), especially being a city this size.

Have to reiterate again...the obvious...newsprint newspapers are as dead as a doornail. Does not mean they will fold tomorrow...but smart money is not buying stock there. They should--and may well be--work on the best possible ways to offer an online version that is enticing in some way...can be an exciting time to come up the the new idea that will make a big splash...but no one wants piles and piles and piles of crap newsprint, that is not worth wasting trees and pollution to make anymore. It's over. I got my start in my vocation and life via newspapers...worked with the Norman Transcript, The Oklahoma Daily, and the Oklahoma City Times and the Daily Oklahoman, the Houston Post, the Houston Chronicle...ink is in my blood. Times have changed. It is merely a juncture in the history of visual communication.

BTW--regarding better writers and reporting...those days are gone as well. As one can readily see on this group of forums...it has become a Tower of Babel, a cacophony of disparate ideas...one can find whatever one wants...literally. I suppose that is good--but--I am not sure. We are destined to live in chaos in the future, I fear, which makes the closing out of my life--which is not far off--far more enticing. Ironic. Best of luck to the rest of you.

well said jmark. the best thing they can do is try to become more innovative, but they won't, sure they know to create a digital version to survive, but they will become less important than the past because they will fail to get what they need to do to become a major influence, instead they will just be another of many online news outlets.

If you want an immediate, post-game analysis of a Thunder game, read Charles Hill at dustbury.com.

I realize that "print is dead" and all, but WTF is up with these six paragraph breezers I see on Newsok.com? No depth, no perspective, one or two quotes, and that's it. Total joke.

Is it just widely believed that consumers don't want any depth of perspective by journalists, and so they don't provide, or has the product just gotten that bad?

I do often admire Steve's work, so I don't put him in that category. His articles are almost always well sourced, researched, substantive, and thoughtful. Some of the other tripe on that paper, though, is just BAD.

I've been reading the Oklahoman for years, and I've noticed the overall quality decline rapidly in the last few years.

There are many notable exceptions in the journalism world to this rule, i.e., New York Times, Wall Street Journal, and to a lesser extent, Washington Post, that do as good or better of a job than any other news medium. But these are exceptions.

I don't believe people are migrating to blogs just to reinforce their opinions. Many do, but many others are turning to blogs because they're hungry for more depth of perspective, something they can't count on as much from traditional media sources.

Alrighty...
- Criticisms of coverage of Skydance Bridge. Bring it up with Bryan Dean, the writer.
- Thunder coverage. Good grief people, the game ended about 12:30-1 a.m. I'm amazed anything got in the paper at that hour. It's not fair to compare The Oklahoman to the Oregonian coverage at that point when one considers the time difference and that it was in OREGON. It's always quicker and easier to go big on coverage when its on your home turf. Notice more coverage was posted this morning...
- Short stuff. No argument here. But here's the thing - the newspaper bosses, not just mine, they hire these consultants. I don't like consultants. But they're hired, they do focus groups, and they come back telling the bosses that readers want shorter stories. Some of us argued such claims, and have tried to show there is a desire for more depth. And to some degree, the consultant's dictates have faded, though I always fear another consultant will be hired who will say the same stuff all over again. It's not a fun situation. You don't like attention deficit disorder journalism? Guess what? I don't either. So as I've said before, don't just complain on an online forum - email the paper's top editors and let them know YOU WANT MORE!
- There are one or two of you who have proven to be totally hostile and I'm not going to bother getting into another flame war. I don't agree that local news organizations like The Oklahoman are doomed, thought I do agree they need to adapt, and I think in some ways we are doing just that (I'm incredibly proud and giddy over the NewsOK application for Ipad. Our multimedia folks are brilliant and innovative).
- I'm not sure you guys are even reading the paper or NewsOK to fully judge what's going on. One
- Bomber, I'm not going to argue with what you're saying. But here's the thing - the audience will echo what you're saying, and yet go the totally opposite direction. Look at cable news. CNN is the one trying more than the others to stay true to traditional reporting - or at least the sort of unbiased news the audience says it wants. And yet who gets the big ratings? Fox News. And then coming in second is MSNBC, which is trying to prove that Fox News hasn't gone nearly far enough in showing bias one way or another. And they've been rewarded for that. And the advertisers flock to MSNBC and Fox News.... see the contradiction?
- Those of us still trying to get some context and depth in the paper need you, the audience, to respond and send an affirmative message to the editors and publishers of various news media and let them know this is what you want. Hot Rod, I did a very in-depth story on the Myriad Gardens restaurants, and I think I've done a decent job keeping folks informed about Urban Renewal. Are we getting it all? No, not by a long shot. Four years ago we had 12 people on the paper's business desk. Now we have seven. Yet we're still all doing our best to try put out the same section we were the 12 people. But look at your own work place and consider how you've tried to do more with less. It's not a good situation.

Steve,

Sounds like you like where you work, and that's good.

A few simple questions. On a scale of 1 (lowest) to 10 (highest),


What rating do you give the Oklahoman's choice not to report on the 10/30/2010 Ghouls Gone Wild parade on or after 10/30/2010?
As to your answer in #1 and in keeping with the title of this thread, do you think that did we deserved better?
What rating do you give the Oklahoman's reporting during the Maps 3 campaign?
As to your answer in #3 and in keeping with the title of this thread, do you think that we deserved better?

It is not entirely fair to try to put Steve on the record against his employer, especially concerning areas in which he is not engaged and which he has no control over. I think Steve has been as candid as he can be.

It is not entirely fair to try to put Steve on the record against his employer, especially concerning areas in which he is not engaged and which he has no control over. I think Steve has been as candid as he can be.
Ordinarily and generally, I would agree with that, Rover. As I said in my 1st comment in this thread, Steve is one of the Oklahoman's bright spots, in my opinion.

However, it was Steve's choice to offer his defense about his employer on what has been said thus far in this thread, some parts going beyond ares in which is not engaged as a reporter, and, with that lengthy reply, as a judge during a trial might say, "Well, you opened that door, counselor. Objection overruled."

I do understand that Steve may not want to say anything negative about his employer, and that's understandable. Since he chose to respond in the thread as he did, it's also fair, I think, to note that if he is unwilling to comment negatively that one ought not take what he DOES have to say as being particularly comprehensive or complete, if that makes sense.

Check out the Portland coverage of the OKC-PDX game last night; all stories published before, during, or within 2-3 hours of the game ending, the first story hit just 5 minutes afte the game, and it was COMPLETE.

I think you're giving them a little more credit than they're due. There's no way the reporter could have interviewed the coach, interviewed a player, worked their quotes into his story, filed it, and gotten it online within 5 minutes of the game ending. I didn't look at the clock last night when the game ended, but it shows that the first story was posted at 10:55 (Portland time, I assume). I think the game ended about 20 minutes before that, didn't it?

Hey guys I can understand the frustration echoed here but I do agree with Steve when comparing the Oklahoman with the Oregonian. It was not fair to compare the two in light of the fact that it was a home game for Portland. Having said that you must realize the Oklahoman has deadlines to meet before going to print and the game did not end until past midnight central time. I will probably get raked over the coals for supporting the Oklahoman but geez cut 'em some slack.
The Oklahoman and NewsOK consistently win numerous regional and statewide awards year in and year out and are both thought of highly by their peers.
Awards won just this year alone. http://newsok.com/awards

Steve, your comments are well received - however, I must point out that even when events happen in OKC, the Daily Oklahoman is brief and slow. They do not provide near as much coverage as what the Oregonian did. Im not buying the excuse of time, as I have seen other markets in Central and Eastern publish and in today's digital age it is expected. You are aware of Breaking News, and when OKC wins a contested matchup - the Oklahoman should have Breaking news because there ARE reporters covering and even attending those games and after all, OKC is a major league city now.

Im not going to individually address reporters because that is the job of the management of the Oklahoman. I am looking/appealing to the Publisher of the paper, to give feedback on my disgust with much of the content of the paper and trying to provide other papers for benchmarking.

There also was no coverage in the Oklahoma of Topeka's or Corpus Christi's visits to OKC. ..... Not a mention.

I don't think it is fair to go directly after Steve on this subject either. He is an employee of the company in question, and puts up with a lot more than most of us would if it were our place of employment being ridiculed.

If anything we need to support Steve in his efforts and direct our questions to the editors and let them know how we feel.

I don't think it is fair to go directly after Steve on this subject either. He is an employee of the company in question, and puts up with a lot more than most of us would if it were our place of employment being ridiculed.

If anything we need to support Steve in his efforts and direct our questions to the editors and let them know how we feel.

Ditto !

Also to Steve specifically, I love and appreciate the hard work you do. You are one of the exceptions.

However, making the claim that the staff has been trimmed does not account for the tardiness of publishing. You must agree with me that the Oklahoman totally biffed it on the SkyDance Bridge - for whatever reason. The story came out late, and it was a one liner - just like almost everything else that comes from City Hall or the local government. It is if the paper wants to publish their opinion or what they WANT the public to know, and that's it "take it or leave it". However, I argue that the public should have known in advance there were problems with the SkyDance Bridge, and that there was going to be a vote at City Hall, and these are ways the public can be involved (including sending emails to council if you can't attend the vote in person).

Instead of advocating the consistent conservative message that is prevalent in the Oklahoman, why not publish the full truth/content timely and urgently and let the public decide for themselves, THEN publish in Editorial what the paper would like to say about it.

Is there a way, Steve, that you could mention this forum in particular to the bosses at the Oklahoman? Forums like this can be even MUCH BETTER tool to guage the public as we have voiced opinions numerous times and being that most participants of OKCTalk are quite opinionated and typically support OKC - I would think this would be more valuable (and cheaper) than hiring consultants who often just say what YOU WANT TO HEAR (as in 'the public wants less content" so YOU CAN SAVE $$ ON PUBLISHING.. as I suspect was the end result of that consulting project).

Yes, in business we have cut and do more with less - it is a fact of life. But in my business, since I have competition, we can't be late on forecasts or business planning which is the end product of my particular span of control.

You also must realize and agree, that things are ALSO EASIER now due to the internet and electronic resources. There is NO REASON for the Oklahoman to have short content and consistently late publishing ONLINE! I think that is the feedback we'd like to share the most.

We deserve better??

It's a private company. We deserve to get what we pay for and lately people are headed to the internet for service that costs them nothing.

I think I'm one of the few people that thinks people will pay to read online newspapers that deliver news in their area. www.Newsok.com (The Oklahoman's site) is very innovative and well-run and I don't see why they don't start charging for daily subscribers. It's not my industry and I'm sure the ones that are making that decision know better than I do but from an outsides POV, start charging.

I paid for my newsok iPhone app the instant I saw that it was available. One of the great things about the internet is that you EASILY charge by section viewable.

Do we deserve better? Nope. Do we want better? Sure...but we can't get better without feeding the source we want to grow.

Ordinarily and generally, I would agree with that, Rover. As I said in my 1st comment in this thread, Steve is one of the Oklahoman's bright spots, in my opinion.

However, it was Steve's choice to offer his defense about his employer on what has been said thus far in this thread, some parts going beyond ares in which is not engaged as a reporter, and, with that lengthy reply, as a judge during a trial might say, "Well, you opened that door, counselor. Objection overruled."

I do understand that Steve may not want to say anything negative about his employer, and that's understandable. Since he chose to respond in the thread as he did, it's also fair, I think, to note that if he is unwilling to comment negatively that one ought not take what he DOES have to say as being particularly comprehensive or complete, if that makes sense.

True, but since this is not a trial, and Steve could potentially lose his job a la NPR, let's cut him some slack.

I agree with Steve 100% over the CNN, FOX, MSNBC row. I am a conservative that watches CNN over Fox, because I don't want a "News" organization to tell me what my opinion is. I just want to hear what the news are.

Back on topic, I think putting some emotional writing on topics such as sports, social events, etc without sounding biased is good and harmless. However, I do not share the same thought on politics, as they do influence people and have bigger consequences.

I think what the consultants failed to observe is that people like short stories on general, broad news, so we stay "in the know". But on topics where we are passionated about, we like to read more and more, things like sports...

Steve is a good friend and I do cut him slack. I'll let it go at that.

Doug I'm not able to answer your four questions. They would be better posed to editors of the newspaper.
- Steve

HotRod,

While I certainly appreciate your efforts to want to bring serious discussion to the matter, asking Steve to serve as proponent of this thread by bringing it up to his bosses is really asking him to step beyond what would be considered appropriate for his role - either here or at the paper.

For those who have significant complaints with the paper, I suggest you heed Steve's earlier advice which is to contact the paper's leadership yourself. I recognize sometimes engaging in discussion such as this one is a more enjoyable way of communicating the matter, but unless there is someone at the Oklahoman who monitors threads exactly such as this, I suggest a better approach to incite actual change would be to engage directly with the individuals responsible for The Oklahoman's content and format.

I'm not disagreeing with what you have to say at all. But using this as your sole means of communication may not be the most effective way of having the right people hear you.

Hot Rod, different reporters take different approaches to various stories. That's why I said you need to take up complaints about the Skydance Bridge with Bryan Dean. If you felt like it should have been taken up in advance, you need to let him know that, and if you're disappointed in how he covered it, talk that out with him as well.
For the most part, I'm not so much arguing with any of you on these matters as I am trying to give insight, as I can, as to how some things are done. I want you, as readers, to know that if you want more in-depth coverage, you need to speak out, you need to let editors know.
I do know that at the Dallas Morning News, they've actually started taking a path divergent from the rest of the industry, providing more content, going more in-depth with news, and doing more investigations. And the Dallas Morning News was rewarded this past quarter by being one of very few papers to post circulation gains. They also reported a nice profit as well.
I do think the newspaper industry as a whole for the past decade has followed BAD advice from consultants who have urged them that the key to survival in the future is by hooking younger readers with shorter and shallower content. I don't agree with this at all, I've been vocal in saying so, and I remain fiercely loyal to the idea that there will continue to be a role for local news to serve the community and in turn, be rewarded through circulation and advertising.
I also think that newspapers do a poor job of reminding their audiences of the role they have played in serving their communities.
Doug is an attorney by trade, and while he's a very good friend, there are times when we disagree quite a bit. I respect him, and I hope he respects me. He wants an answer to every question. But there are times when I'm not the right person to answer a question.
It's a fine line for me. I will admit there have been times when I've not always made the right call in how I respond or communicate on this site. I'm doing my best,and I do respect how this online community tries to be better connected to what's going on in their hometown.

Doug I'm not able to answer your four questions. They would be better posed to editors of the newspaper.
- Steve
Thanks. That IS an answer. As for a letter to your editors, you may recall that I've tried that approach before ... actually a friend suggested it then, too. The letter is fully set forth at http://dougdawg.blogspot.com/2009/11/quo-vadis-oklahoman.html, originally posted there on November 10, 2009 but the post was updated December 5, 2009. It was sent to to David Thompson, president of the OPUBCO Communications Group and publisher of the Oklahoman, Christy Gaylord Everest, chair and chief executive for the Oklahoma Publishing Company, and David Kelley, editor of the Oklahoman.

I won't restate that letter here ... it is at the above link ... it asked 6 questions.

Responses were invited, none were given. Why should they respond? The Oklahoman has the only game in town and they know it.

Any other suggestions?

Hot Rod * * *
* * * Doug is an attorney by trade, and while he's a very good friend, there are times when we disagree quite a bit. I respect him, and I hope he respects me. He wants an answer to every question. But there are times when I'm not the right person to answer a question.
You know that I respect you a lot. You said that, "He wants an answer to every question." Of course I do. But I'd be pleased to get at least one question answered from taking the approach you mentioned (communicating with editors, etc.) ... see the above.

Doug, I'm just a cog in the wheel. At the end of the day, I can only answer for what I can answer.

I understand. Did you read what I said ... I didn't say (last 2 messages) answers FROM YOU ... I said answers from your bosses.

I know. We're good. You're my favorite fellow history geek and you always will be.

When I was twelve years old, my first job was distribution of the Daily Oklahoman/Oklahoma City Times.

We often teased one another about "flunkying for Gaylord." Our paper station managers were not the most honorable, trustworthy or desirable leaders--we had fringe benefits: Redcross, Bluecross (cold days), Greencross (collections) and on pay day we got Double-crossed!

The Oklahoman had extended coverage for local semi-pro teams (89ers, Blazers, Calvary, Slickers, Dolls, Plainsmen...) and our major colleges.

The Oklahoma Journal (W. P. 'Bill' Atkinson) was their competition.

I've learned over the years that E.K. & E.L. Gaylord had a dominance as Oklahoma's most influencial newspaper which was unique among news print media throughout the United States.

It is what it is; although the Oklahoman is a good listener, it is immune to change.

and that last sentence is what is sad and why I said we deserve better.

Steve, I didn't start this thread to get you into any trouble, I started only to voice my opinion and give the people of OKC who may not know an opportunity to see how it is done in other markets. I only mentioned you because you are our greatest asset from the paper and I assumed the leadership wanted feedback from the online community. If you will be so kind, please let me know whom to contact. I don't mind to lend some of my business advice and prospective to OKC businesses, as I care about OKC and want it to succeed and get better; even if it is volunteer. haha

Casey YOU might think OKC doesn't deserve the right to good press, but I beg to differ. And contrary to your way of thinking on this, you should be aware that we are paying for even the online edition of NewsOK - because it is based on # of page hits that they charge their advertisers; and YES, we DO see the ads. They charge a price for their paper - print and online, and we pay it - and the journalistic content is not there and what does get published, comes far too LATE in many cases or is heavily slanted/spinned to one direction.

Hey guys I can understand the frustration echoed here but I do agree with Steve when comparing the Oklahoman with the Oregonian. It was not fair to compare the two in light of the fact that it was a home game for Portland. Having said that you must realize the Oklahoman has deadlines to meet before going to print and the game did not end until past midnight central time. I will probably get raked over the coals for supporting the Oklahoman but geez cut 'em some slack.
The Oklahoman and NewsOK consistently win numerous regional and statewide awards year in and year out and are both thought of highly by their peers.
Awards won just this year alone. http://newsok.com/awards

Not to quibble, but the Oklahoman rarely if ever takes sweepstakes at SPJ. Tulsa World does every year. Given the Oklahoman's resources, this is embarrassing, in my opinion.

I think Steve said it all when he talked about a department that had 12 going to 7. You can't have the same expectations on quality and detail when you start cutting the people that produce the work. All media is cutting back. The few that have the luxury of being in print, radio or TV do so with more and more added to their plate every day and they are normally the first to take it on the chin when
salary cuts are on the table, not the consultants or the people who hire them.

Chris
http://www.radiookc.com

radio, I disagree.

In business we have had to cut staff too. Most of my peers dont have administrative assistants anymore and in finance all of our business plans and statements must still have the content and signatures needed to satisfy our customers (the government and the stakeholders). It is my job to ensure the product is consistent and is on time despite a lean staff. If not, there is a competitor waiting for our overall products and/or my job. The Oklahoman has NO competition, there is no alternate voice in OKC. There's no excuse, particularly when Steve posts quite well written and timely articles himself.

Also, these guys are journalists or are in journalism. I knew people in university who were in those studies, and all they did was write and try to make sense of their content. Im sure Steve will agree, most if not all journalists actually write too much and it is the editors who trim things down or change the position prior to publishing. If you look at the Portland stories I published, all the did was state the facts, history, and did some investigation/interviews and published that particularly to back up any claims the paper tried to make. That lets the public be informed with a nice thick paper or article and lends some credibility to any editorials the paper made since they cited somebody in the know or otherwise credible when making any assertions, assumptions, or claims.

It shouldn't be too difficult for a major metro paper like the Oklahoman to match the content and investigative journalism at least on the few topics (esp if peer and even lower markets can do it) that people care about most in OKC: Sports (especially OU, OSU, OCU, and OKC's pro teams), City Government - particularly MAPS, Project 180, and urban renewal/downtown, Business/Economy, Events/Activities, and OKC related press. I notice they only rise and deliver when it comes to the colleges, particularly OU (OCU gets NO LOVE, no coverage).

This is what I will recommend once I receive contact information of the leadership of newsok.

Since the topic is really local media in general, I thought I would post something about our local TV news. I really like KOCO's news cast because they tend to just report the news in a 'hard news' type of format. I honestly don't watch the local news that often, but when I do I find myself tuning into channel 5 because it seems to be the only remaining place where I don't have to set through an anchors anecdotes or scowls in between stories, or opinion pieces that close out the newscast. That is really what I prefer, solid information free of opinion, and I wish there was more of that in the local news.

One thing I wish there was more of, because I don't know that any of the stations are really doing it, is in-depth local reporting. For example, it is amazing to me that we live in a world where I can turn on the TV at any given hour and see what my federal Congress folks are doing, live on TV, but for almost the entire duration of our state Congress' session I typically can barely recall even one video shot from the floor. I don't think I have ever heard a report of or from the state Supreme Court, except for the piece about the justice who died recently.

There is so much goofy stuff that goes on in this state that everyone just sort of gives a pass to. No one really questions why some things are the way they are, and definitely no media entity is doing much in the way of follow-up reporting. For that you have to turn to the newspapers, but even they don't do enough of that sort of reporting.

Here's a great example. ABLE stated this week that they have decided to ban the alcohol-energy drink 4LOCO from Oklahoma. Now I honestly don't care about this product or its ban. But what I do care about is why does ABLE think it has the right to do this? Does it have the right to do this? How is it that Oklahoma's health authority tried to ban smoking in public places a few years ago and was met with giant public rebuke and was told that something of that nature needed to be voted on by either Congress or the people, but this instance goes unnoticed? My point is that most often times our news organizations are really only "triggered" to go out and talk to someone about something when a large group of people freak out and get mad about whatever the issue is. It shouldn't be that way. There should be people out there constantly looking for the story, not waiting for a press release or a disgruntled citizen to bring the news to them. When I think of great news organizations around the country that is what I think of.

Unfortunately, real journalism is a dying discipline, either nationally or locally. Opinion based networks like Fox, blogs and pseudo journalistic web sites continue to degrade this important function. Free press is mandated, but responsible press is not. If we as the public want actual news instead of fluff, opinion, and cats caught in trees reports, then we have to demand it with our money. When advertising in the Oklahoman ceases to work, or when the readership severely diminishes then we might see change. Though you guys don't think the Oklahoma has competition, they do. Every web site, blog, tv news show, etc. is competition. Even this site is competition. Cancel subscriptions and quit favoring advertisers you see in the paper and if there are enough like you there will be changes. Problem is, there are 30 on this site and 100,000 buying the paper. Who do you think they really care about their opinions?

Since the topic is really local media in general, I thought I would post something about our local TV news. I really like KOCO's news cast because they tend to just report the news in a 'hard news' type of format. I honestly don't watch the local news that often, but when I do I find myself tuning into channel 5 because it seems to be the only remaining place where I don't have to set through an anchors anecdotes or scowls in between stories, or opinion pieces that close out the newscast. That is really what I prefer, solid information free of opinion, and I wish there was more of that in the local news.

I watch KOCO-5 as well...I am driven to distraction at the head-bobbing and drivel from any of the bucket-headed Ogles...whose father was a great sportscaster--but they are just pretenders to the throne...Anita Blanton just gives the news--a real pro in my books. I don't want hers or anyone else's opinion on it--that is MY job when watching the news...what next--canned laughter?

[I]Since

well said dismayed and Jmark. This is what I was intending with this thread - a place to vent all OKC media but praise those we think are doing it right.

There maybe only be 30 on OKC Talk (but the membership is well over that) - but the people on OKCTalk are the most vocal and/or most likely to actually do/say something. I totally agree with the lack of local coverage, particularly the government in OKC/OK State. OKC is the capital city yet people there HARDLY know what is going on govt wise; you would think it would have more dc like 'transparent' media coverage - maybe that is why Tulsan's really hate OKC/Capital because they see things happening in a vacuum. ??

My personal pet peeve is the poor grammar used by some of our local reporters, particularly reporting from the field. I cringe when the channel 4 helicopter pilot covers tornadoes because he frequently uses incorrect grammar and frequently national media airs the coverage. Embarrassing. While his piloting skills may be good, his grammar is very poor.

Guys, I want the newspaper to be better too. I'm fiercely loyal to the idea that The Oklahoman is, and should continue to be, a leading journalistic voice in this community. NO OTHER local news source delivers as much news as The Oklahoman. Can we do better? You bet. Are some of your complaints valid? Yes.
And when the next consultant comes in (Oh how I wish they would go away), I'll see if I can't invite some of you to share your concerns. And I hope my contribution to this discussion hasn't come off as sounding defensive. I don't mind the criticism. Heck, I just wish you were guys were louder when it comes to demanding more depth and content. Just understand there are areas where I can provide some understanding and explanation, and there are other areas where it's more appropriate for others to speak. And yes, it's when someone like myself begins to speak on matters where it should be others talking that can lead to bad consequences.
One last thought: I can pretty much guarantee there are people in Oregon who hate The Oregonian. I can guarantee there are people who hate the Dallas Morning News, the New York Times, the Wall Street Journal, and so on. Typically the papers that tend to have the best reputations are those that are no longer with us - The Tulsa Tribune (my personal favorite - God they were great!), The Rocky Mountain News, The Dallas Herald, and yes, the Oklahoma Journal.
As someone who has been researching the history of Bill Atkinson and the Oklahoma Journal, let me just add this - they weren't perfect either.

My personal pet peeve is the poor grammar used by some of our local reporters, particularly reporting from the field. I cringe when the channel 4 helicopter pilot covers tornadoes because he frequently uses incorrect grammar and frequently national media airs the coverage. Embarrassing. While his piloting skills may be good, his grammar is very poor.

I think that problem runs acrosst their whole on-camera staff...I know--cause I seen it!

Them thar be some insulting kind of language you be using again' my freends in da profesheon, you hear?

Them thar be some insulting kind of language you be using again' my freends in da profesheon, you hear?

Well dog my cats--that writer-feller is gettin' mighty uppity!

'Taint tru. I jus' as doone as I is up.

Guys, I want the newspaper to be better too. * * *
Good post, Steve. I wish that you were/are typical, which you are not, but ... but ... but ...

Thanks for what you do.

If E.K. Gaylord was still alive...he would take a flit-gun and clear out the executive offices and put Steve in as Publisher and Editor--and as he left he would say--"I'll be back in six months...you better show me somethin'..."

If E.K. were that good ... which he may have been (heck, he went back into the early 1900s), I'd say,

YEAH

Put Steve in as Publisher and Editor--and as he left he would say--"I'll be back in six months...you better show me somethin'..."
Beyond that, though, he wouldn't be telling his underlings what or what not to say, on what to report, when to say it, or how to report it.

Not a job I'm qualified for. I'm a writer and reporter. Had a shot at sampling the editor track a decade ago and found out I couldn't stand working with jerks like myself.

As a practicing jerk, I have to state the following about my timely Thunder coverage:

(1) It's usually up within half an hour of the buzzer.

(2) It's limited to four or five paragraphs, max. (I do have a day job, and West Coast games just about kill me.)

(3) I don't have anywhere near the experience of Darnell Mayberry or John Rohde, though I'm reasonably up on the game. (Royce's stuff at Daily Thunder is way better and much more detailed, but it takes him longer to write his game coverage.)

(4) I did predict the Sonics move, way back in December '05.

http://www.dustbury.com/archives/005633.html

That said, we thank you for your support.

I'll be damned. I hadn't recognized that "windowphobe" was one in the same person as Oklahoma's premier blogger Chas. B. Hill aka Dustbury. As you know very well, Dustbury aka Chas. B. Hill has everyone's support ... or at least one or the other of those identities if it becomes more convenient to divide them.

Congrats window and very well said. I wish the OKC media gave as much content. Steve is one of the FEW who get it, thank GOD he covers downtown.

Not a job I'm qualified for. I'm a writer and reporter. Had a shot at sampling the editor track a decade ago and found out I couldn't stand working with jerks like myself.

Trust me--if you continue to do well--they will force you to do it. With cash. It works on everyone--just hold out for the most you can get.

Alrighty...
- Thunder coverage. Good grief people, the game ended about 12:30-1 a.m. I'm amazed anything got in the paper at that hour. It's not fair to compare The Oklahoman to the Oregonian coverage at that point when one considers the time difference and that it was in OREGON. It's always quicker and easier to go big on coverage when its on your home turf. Notice more coverage was posted this morning...




In this digital age, it is instant gratification, instant education that drives things like Fantasy Football, sports betting heck even the topics people talk about every day are because of immediate coverage. I work for an international business, where if I receive something in stock in Miami, Seattle will know 1 second later, just in case the Seattle Company has a project in Miami. Doesn’t matter how often, it just matters that it projects in other states DO happen. We are driven by the business needs.

To suggest that it is 1am and nobody is interested in what happens, or getting the info out pronto, is to imply Thunder fans aren’t up at the end of that fantastic game. Those fans are not going to want to know right away how Westbrook played a fantastic game and all the stats that go with it. Part of Fandom is wallering in a win...knowing the comparisons, reliving that dunk or 'what was the score when Ibaka made that momentum swinging block down low'? If I am up until 1am watching and supporting the thunder...the least the media can do is be up processing the info digitally. How long does a digital patch download take, even for a thorough story, even from a cell phone...3-4min maybe? Even the NBA posts videos up to the half so NBA fans in general can see how the game is developing. Fans dont want OLDS they want NEWS.

Surely the Oklahoman can find a way to be THE SOURCE of information. If not, the paper will be as slow as the patrons that read it. People do not want slow, just ask any auto maker. When the Thunder play, I rarely go to its hometown paper for info. How sad is that! I mentioned this problem last year to the paper and got the reply that more information will be posted in the morning…I see it is still an ongoing problem, sad.

Unfortunately, for news in the digital age, IN PARTICULAR - Sports...time IS money, both for the Oklahoman, but also for many fans of sports.