Patterns & Paradigms | The Pattern Podcast
Patterns & Paradigms | The Pattern Podcast
Season 2 Episode 08: Fake News VS Fact-Based Journalism with Barry Rothfeld
Long before the pandemic, there were those who were writing the death of the modern American newspaper. With the rise of the internet and social media, news commentary has gained dominance to achieve likes and ratings to attract advertising dollars, while local newspapers have consolidated into widespread regional hubs as subscriptions have dwindled. This week we're exploring the future of journalism and the media - news versus news commentary, press release journalism versus investigative reporting, finding fact in the world of "fake news" and "alternative facts," and what that all means for local news.
This week's episode features Barry Rothfeld, Retired, President and Publisher at The Poughkeepsie Journal, former editor and journalist.
We are experiencing a paradigm shift, a fundamental change in the way we usually do things. We are intentionally choosing to see the silver lining opportunity arises. We can shine a light on the things that weren't working well on those things that weren't really working at all, we can regroup reevaluate and re-engineer it's time to explore new patterns and paradigms those that inspire us to rise above the chaos and explore how the conditions of today and take us to a better tomorrow patterns and paradigms the pattern podcast from Hudson Valley pattern for progress. You're listening to season two, episode eight, fake news versus fact-based journalism with your host pattern, president and CEO, Jonathan Dropkin.
Speaker 2:Hi everyone, and welcome to patterns and paradigms. We hope you enjoy the discussion we had last week with Mecca Mitchell, the senior vice president for diversity inclusion and community engagement, as well as the chief diversity officer for Westchester medical center. Please remember to subscribe to our podcast and take a moment to share an episode with a friend bubble or trend the weather in Texas. I certainly hope that the storm last week is not a trend like everything else in the United States. Why shouldn't a winter storm be polarizing. The entire state loses its electricity, but in the rush to blame someone, you could choose a severe storm that challenged a self-contained electric grid that was not made for severe weather, or you could blame the fact that some of the energy that Texas produces comes from green energy, wind turbines and solar rays. We can only hope that the desire to blame alternative energy is the bubble and that the trend is to seek more comprehensive, integrated, and innovative ways of addressing energy needs is the trend, but Hey, it's Texas. So whether there is a bubble or a trend, well, let's just say that if in the midst of the impact of one of the most severe storms in the state's history, one of its U S senators decides it's time to head to Cancun. Well, it is part of a trend, but not the kind we just described before I introduce our guests. Let me ask my partner at pattern, Joe Chakka what's up, Joe, how you doing Joe?
Speaker 3:Pretty well surviving another storm up this way.
Speaker 2:It's just incredible. It just doesn't stop snowing. I always thought this was like a bad Stephen King book. What's happening this week at, Hey, we're working pretty hard on putting the class together for our community Rebuilders program where I think what we're it, Joe, it's a takeoff on something you and I created a couple of years ago called community builders, where we work with people on an idea that they may have for their community and try to take it to a full blown plan for a project.
Speaker 3:Yeah, it's hard to believe five years ago, you and I came up with this brain brain child of an idea of creating the community builders and it worked out pretty well. We had two years worth of classes and we had anywhere between six and eight, uh, you know, professionals, uh, go through the course and they took a project and we tried to help them make it come to fruition. And we had a couple of really good successes downtown Middletown Garnerville arts center, uh, the Ritz theater. So it was a very, very valuable program. I think that a lot of people got gotten a lot of good information out of and, and their projects did well. So, you know, last year we were thinking about doing the class again and with all of the things going on with the pandemic we thought, are we really building a community? Or as you said, are we rebuilding the community? And I think the rebuilding fits very well. So last week we had an information session on the upcoming class and we had somewhere around 60 or 65 people register for the information center. We had 40 and attendance, which was great. And because the others couldn't attend last week, we decided this week, we're going to run it again. And so on Wednesday, February 24th, at 5:00 PM, you can tune into the community Rebuilders information session to learn more about this year's class, which is going to start in April run through June. It's very much a fast moving, uh, bootcamp style, uh, community development project and our program and, uh, applications will be due March 1st
Speaker 2:Well. And I think we're, we're trying to limit the size of the class to ensure that, uh, pattern staff can give the participants the kind of attention they need in developing their projects. So I think our goal is to really have only 10. And I think there's only just, you know, two or three slots left. That's correct.
Speaker 3:Uh, you know, B, if we go beyond 10 people, then we've, we think that we can't give the focus and the attention on the projects that, that they deserve. Um, and it's going to be very intensive, both for the participants and for our own staff, because we always take things and make them our own, if you will. And, and when we do this, we put more time in than we probably should on some of these projects because we just like them so much and we want to see our community to advance
Speaker 2:Well. And I think that you've hit it on the head, Joe, that, you know, if someone comes to the pattern with an idea and we think we can help them, then we kind of adopt it and we want it to come to fruition. And there's been a lot of projects that we've been involved in over the years that we feel just that way, everything else going on.
Speaker 3:Well, funny, you should ask tune into our YouTube channel, go to our website, and you'll be able to find the event for this month's housing webinar and is focusing on the moratorium on evictions. We have an all-star panel that, that we did a prerecording on. Um, and we're talking to, um, advocates, we're talking to, uh, lenders and affordable housing. And I was talking to legal services and really trying to hit every side of the eviction issue. Uh, both of what's going on now. And unfortunately what's probably coming down the line in four, six, maybe eight months. There's going to be a heck of a crisis that we're going to be facing. Um, and this webinar really covers a lot of those issues.
Speaker 2:The eviction crisis is the fact that people have not been able to make their rent payments landlords on the other side, do need money in order to maintain their properties. So this is really an important thing
Speaker 3:It is. And, you know, in, in short, I'd like to say that the rent crisis for people not paying is critical to the landlord. Obviously it's critical to the tenant because you know that, and that's why the eviction is there. You know, nobody wants to get kicked out on the street. And so, you know, the, the, the moratorium itself is important because it does stop the eviction. But as we all say in this business, the rent does come due. And that's the big problem is that there may be some tenants that are four, six, 10, 12 months behind in rent, and how do they make up those kinds of arrears? And so some of the guests are talking about some other rent relief programs. Um, and again, our legal services representative, um, is talking about, you know, taking care of some issues where there may be some unscrupulous landlords, uh, in the business, Joe, thanks a lot for taking issue on,
Speaker 2:And, and it's going to be enormous as this, uh, as we come out of the pandemic and the expectation is people need to pay their rent. So, um, a lot going on here at pattern. Thanks, Joe. Thank you today. We're going to be talking with Barry Rothfeld. Barry has had a long and distinguished career in journalism from reporter to editor to publisher. Barry has been in probably every position in the print media world. He has chaired the New York newspaper publisher associations board of directors, and as both executive editor and publisher of the Poughkeepsie journal here in Duchess County is well versed on the issues facing the Hudson Valley. Hi, Barry, good to have you on patterns and paradigms, how you doing, and it sure seems like judging by our zoom call. You're not looking at snow right now.
Speaker 4:No, Jonathan, first of all, thanks for having me. It's great to see you, even though we're 1200 miles apart or so I'm actually here in sunny, Florida. And, um, I could tell you that I could join the chamber of commerce if I had to.
Speaker 2:And, and how have you managed through the pandemic? Have you been down in Florida or where, you know,
Speaker 4:W we've been, we've been down here since February 1st, so, and, um, other than that, we've been just like everyone else. We've been hunkered down in Hopewell junction, New York, and, uh, managing our way through it, wearing our masks religiously. Are we now double mask? Even, even though we did get our first vaccination, uh, but we still take it very, very carefully. We haven't eaten inside a restaurant yet. Um, we basically bring food home. We eaten outside the restaurant where we've been comfortable that the tables were far enough apart. And, uh, even if we get our second vaccination, I think we're going to be doing that same thing just to be extra careful.
Speaker 2:Cool. And I think this is going to all of 20, 21. There's going to be some aspect of this pandemic. That's going to be with us. So, you know, Barry, I've known you since you've been, uh, you've been a publisher you've told me about, you know, parts of your career in, in state organizations in the media. Um, but why don't for our listeners? Why don't you briefly walk through your bio and tell us your career, which makes it, it will make it clear to our listeners why I asked you to join me on this topic?
Speaker 4:Well, thanks. Um, well, I wasn't always the publisher. I wasn't always on the business side of the, a medium sized business. I started as a reporter actually. Um, you know, I, um, back in college I was editor of my college paper. Um, and, um, we're not to Columbia journalism school and that a job would get net right out of college at the port Chester daily item in Westchester. Um, and I stayed in Westchester for 17 years in various, uh, reporting and editing roles and became senior managing editor down there. Um, and it was a great opportunity, great learning environment, good journalism. And I always credit that opportunity in that environment with my love for community journalism and my belief that, um, you know, local journalism was sort of where it's at in terms of the impact we can have on our communities in 90. I got the opportunity to move up to the Poughkeepsie journal as the top editor and, um, uh, fell in love with the Mid-Hudson Valley, um, and, uh, always vowed that it would be my permanent home, although Ganette had different, different ideas for me. Um, and after, um, three or four years transferred me up to Binghamton New York, um, where I was the top editor there. And, um, a couple of years, three or four years later, um, the opportunity to become a publisher was presented to me. And after, so after about 25 years in the editorial side of the business, I considered the options and decided to take the plunge and became publisher at the Africa journal, um, which is a great town to live in Ethica, um, four hours from everywhere, however, um, and in the snowbelt, um, but a great community and we make great lifelong friends, but I always want them to come back to Poughkeepsie. And several years after that job, um, I was, uh, when Dick Waco was getting ready to retire after an illustrious career at the Poughkeepsie journal, I was given the opportunity to come back to Poughkeepsie where I always want them to come back to and end my career. And in 20 2004, I came back to, um, the Poughkeepsie journal as the publisher where, um, you know, I kind of always wanted to be, um, I think the transition from editor to publisher was a natural one for me. I mean, one of the things that always made a great, uh, a great decision for me is that I still was able to keep my hands on the editorial side of the business. I also was able to take off some of the restrictions on being on the edit as being an editor, as I was able to get more involved in community activities. Of course, um, you know, I become became very, very active in a bunch of community activities, being, serving on a number of boards and being chair of a couple of them. So that was, um, something that, um, was a bonus, some becoming on the business side of the, of the legislative speak.
Speaker 2:So you've been a reporter, you've been an editor, you've been a publisher. And I think you've also told me that you were parts of various state associations that, um, in the media world.
Speaker 4:Yeah, I was, um, I was a long, a long time, um, uh, trustee of the New York state, um, newspaper publishers association. And I actually was chair of that board also for one or two terms. And, uh, it was, uh, an organization that also went through many, many changes as the business changed. And I'm sure we're going to discuss that in the next 35 to 40 minutes as, um, you know, the, the member organizations throughout the state, um, went from being robust and cash rich to being less. So I'll put it like that. And, uh, you know, and, and, and they had to do a lot, a lot more with a lot less
Speaker 2:Long before the pandemic. There were those who were writing the death of the modern American newspaper. And then, you know, as a result of social media, where were we before the pandemic?
Speaker 4:Long before the pandemic, people were talking about the death of the American newspaper, that we were losing subscribers, that young people weren't coming to newspapers, but, um, I would go to conferences even as a middle editor, um, and people would talk about the need to attract the readers because we're not going to get the readers that would be able to support our advertising. But the truth of the matter is right up until the 2008 financial crisis, newspapers were really, really strong business operations. Um, we were able to have enough readers to deliver strong results for our advertisers. We made good money. We had very, very strong profit margins, and we in very, very good shape at the 2008 financial crisis not hit, who knows where we would be, of course, with the advent of the growth of the internet. Um, you could accuse the industry of really not keeping up and getting out ahead of that and becoming, uh, getting on the digital bandwagon, so to speak quickly enough, and really not figuring out a way to not only attract digital subscribers and digital readers, but never really figuring out a way how to monetize that. I hate that word, but that is an important thing when you're talking about the business. So yes, it was, um, it was a factor, um, before the pandemic. And of course the pandemic is something that, um, accelerated a lot of those factors.
Speaker 2:So within the Hudson Valley and just correct me if I'd characterize this wrong, it, it, it almost feels as if the, um, newspapers are even being consolidated more that the three prominent go-to newspapers when I started pattern where the Poughkeepsie journal, the times Herald record and the journal news, but they now appear to be almost one newspaper frequently seeing the same story. They're all owned by Ganette. I think so help me out if I've mischaracterized that
Speaker 4:Well, that's true. Um, we can add is not the Ganette that I worked for. This is the new dinette in 2019 Jeanette and Gatehouse merged. And it was really a takeover by, um, by Gatehouse and it just adopted the Ganette name. So it only is Gatehouse who and
Speaker 2:Barry, who is Gatehouse.
Speaker 4:Well, date house was another large, um, media, newspaper, Cottonelle, largely newspaper company, um, that, um, owned a bunch of regional newspapers, I think, including Middletown, they took the Godette name, but the people who run the new company are all the top. People are the Gatehouse. People continue to consolidate operations. So it became a larger and larger company. And this happened not only in the Hudson Valley, but around the company and the, um, and staff was cut. Um, I think in the last few months they made buyout offers to anyone who would take it. Um, and so, and I'm not being critical of this. I'm just stating what I know, um, my understanding of what, of what happened. And so what they ended up doing is, uh, providing more regional content. Um, and, um, the control of white appears tends to be run out of a, uh, regional hub. Um, and, um, so that is, you know, something that is different than when I ran the paper out of eight 85 civic center Plaza, so to speak.
Speaker 2:Absolutely. And so it's interesting that as the, the papers that I knew when I first got to pattern, you know, 15 years ago, continue to consolidate, I have this feeling though, that there is the rise of the really local paper, either print or online that so many of the communities in the Hudson Valley beacon, or, or around, uh, Ellenville or, uh, in Sullivan County, the Democrat, it seems like almost everyone either has a little print paper or an online paper covering a tiny geographic area.
Speaker 4:Is that these kind of micro-site, um, operations are, um, up and running. I have no idea how their finances work or whether they make any money or not. But I do know that there are a lot of them are out there and, and beating the bigger boys, two stories on a regular basis. Um, um, that said, um, I do have to wonder from a first amendment point of view, who is out there providing the checks and balances on local government, uh, these days, like we used to do in the good old days, um, as opposed to what I would call, um, press-release journalism. There's a lot of stories out there that are just basically, um, rewrites of what's handed to report is as opposed to people going to the scenes of, of, um, of, uh, what's happening out there, or going to meetings, or actually trying to dig through public records and trying to scratch the surface. So scratch below the surface to find out what's really going on. I mean, there's, there's some of that going on at, at, um, at the cadet paper still is a, you know, like David McKay, Wilson is still out there doing really good investigative journalism, but there's not as much of that going on as it was in the days that, um, you know, backed into the nineties and early two thousands as you would see. And that's one of the things that worries me as, um, vibrant newspaper operations become far and fewer.
Speaker 2:So I, I think that's a good place to jump off on the issue of quote unquote fake news. It's, it's, you know, it's sad since, you know, I grew up and I am old enough to remember who Edward R Murrow and Walter Cronkite were in. And you had this sense that when it was uttered by Walter Cronkite on the CBS evening news, it was fact it was checked, it was researched. And yet the attack on media being fake news, and very much to your point, the role of the media as the fourth estate and being there to challenge government at all levels, whether, you know, we've seen it play out in Washington or Poughkeepsie, um, where, where are we in and how do we ensure the vitality of the fourth estate? One question, and the second question, how do we restore people's confidence?
Speaker 4:Well, let me, let me kind of go back to where I think this has all come from, and this is kind of my off the cuff analysis, for lack of a better word. You know, I think it started with talk radio back in the, you know, 20 years ago and it morphed into what's happened on cable cable, um, cable, I'll call it quote unquote news. Um, you know, and, and over the years that has become more fractured and more fractious in a way. Um, and you know, people don't go to these stations to find out what's happening or to really find out a fair and balanced to use that term, um, reflection of what's going on out there. They turn into these stations to reinforce their and beliefs, right. And, and, um, and in many respects, it's serving to further divide an already divided country. And that's very sad and very scary and how you reverse that. I'm not sure I had the prescription for that, except that maybe that there's a leader out there who will be able to do that someday. Um, some, um, hopefully the leader will be someone who can bring people together as opposed to a leader who will further divide people. That's the scary part. You don't know who that person might be someday. Um, you know, there are still good broadcasts and, and, um, and, and re and, and reporters out there who report fairly, but I don't know that people recognize that anymore. And, um, and, and that's a sad state of affairs, but to be honest with you, because I, people tend to look at things through their own set of lenses. And, um, and, and we've, we've come this far and reversing that trend is going to be a very hard thing to do.
Speaker 2:You know, I I've often thought that, you know, the, the actual reporting, uh, there, uh, let's see if I can break it down this way and see if you agree with this. So like, if you take even the two biggest, most trusted newspapers being, let's say the New York times and the wall street journal, that their reporting is very good up until you get to the editorial page. Right. And the editorial page is got, you know, in both newspapers has very little to do with the I'm going to say, and this is a little unfair, but it has little to do with the actual news. It is an editorial. It is. And the same thing has happened on CNN and Fox that most people think when they're watching CNN and Fox between let's say eight and 11:00 PM, that it is the news I refer to. It is news commentary.
Speaker 4:Yeah. It's, it's, uh, it's the equivalent of an op-ed page.
Speaker 2:Yes. But people listen and they go, yes, I heard it on CNN. And that, therefore it's true. I heard it on Fox. And then depending on your point of view, as you said before, you will then refer to it as well. Those people don't reinforce. What I want to know is therefore it's fake news or it's not real news.
Speaker 4:Yeah. I mean, the problem with that is that now you have MSNBC on the far left and you have Fox news on the far. Right. And you would have hoped that somebody would, some station would be in the middle CNN, obviously isn't on. And the problem is, is that they probably wouldn't get any ratings. Cause there was a down the middle fact-based broadcast, which is a sad state of affair. But now you mentioned the term fake news, the other term that kind of goes along with that would be alternative facts. Right. Right, right. So, you know, kind of those kinds of terms floating out there, we're in a, we're in a situation where people have to try to get the muddle their way through the wads of information out there and try to form their own opinion about things. Now, whether people take the time to do that, or they're easily swayed by people who, um, shout above the din, that's another story.
Speaker 2:And it would seem buried that right now, you know, for the last year, during a pandemic, if there was ever a time that we needed facts and we needed science that this is it. And yet, you know, I love to say, Oh, how naive Jonathan was when he said pandemic, that'll be the thing that'll bring us all together because we're all in it together and how wrong I was. And yeah,
Speaker 4:Isn't that, isn't that the truth, you know, that you could
Speaker 2:Polarize a pandemic. Now it was there a role for the media to, I mean, to try its best to unpolluted rise it, or, or, you know, it, the media unfortunately is no different than any other part of society. It is you're on one side or the other, the same tribalism exists in the media right now.
Speaker 4:And then the, the pandemic was, was, was polarized. Wasn't it? I mean, it became an issue to be polarized as opposed to an issue to bring people together. And that was the problem. It could have been, uh, an issue. It could have been a, um, something that brought us together, but it was, it wasn't not used that way. So therefore it became the same kind of issue as any other and polarize people, you know, down here. Um, I guess just to be probably ended up being on the national news, they, they showed a, uh, Tampa supermarket where nobody wore masks. And the owner basically said, I don't believe anybody. I don't believe 400 people, 400,000 people have died. Well, it's now 500,000, 400,000 people have died of this pandemic. It's, it's not true. You know, it's no more than it's no more than heart disease and you he's still, he was still espousing that. And he basically said, no one needs to wear a mask in my supermarket. People are merrily walking in. It was okay.
Speaker 2:It was a national story. So yes. So let me, let me see if I can ask you to, to, to, you know, think out loud with me. So if you were still either the editor, we're the publisher of a newspaper, like the Poughkeepsie journal, uh, you know, a newspaper in Duchess County, New York, how would you have covered the story of the pandemic in an effort? I, you know, I, I only know you have the highest caliber of news reporting and, and I asked this question making no judgment whatsoever on the current Poughkeepsie journal. I'm just saying,
Speaker 4:So, so let me, let me try to give you an analogy. So one of the more difficult and divisive issues to cover. So the last 20, 25 years has always been the fight over abortion. Okay. And it was always an issue, always very, very difficult on how to cover that because you couldn't satisfy either side. Um, if you called it, um, right to life, um, people were opposed to that. It's not right. The wife, it's something else. If we called it pro abortion, well, it wasn't pro-abortion, it was right to choose. If you know what I mean, it was, you never could satisfy the other side. So you basically try to present all sides of the story as fairly as you could. When you wrote a story on the covering, you made sure to cover both sides. If there was a rally, if you met, if you've covered, you basically had to try to be as fair as possible. You went back to the roots of journalism, get the other side of the story, make sure you quote as many sources in each story as you can. And don't, um, buy into one side or the other without giving the other side of the story opportunity to have a fair say. I think that will be the same formula in, in this, in that, you know, that there were going to be two sides of the story and that they were going to people who disagreed with you, but try to go to expert sources where you can and let the facts speak for themselves.
Speaker 2:But no, no, no, no. That, it's very helpful in, in two ways. First of all, I think what I'm hearing in that is partially an answer to how we may get back to the respect that journalism once had and still has in many places. But you know, it's been under attack for years now, and that is, you're saying, you'd go back to basics. You go back to journalism one Oh one to say, how do you construct a news story is partially what I heard in that. Um, and that, I think that becomes really important. Um, but you know, it's interesting Barry that right now in the Hudson Valley, 20 fully 25% of people won't get vaccinated. Now, some of it or people that are anti-vaxxers, some of it are people that are simply distrustful. Some of it are people that say, well, I'm going to wait until other people get it to see if there's something bad with the vaccine. What role does journalism, if you were assigning reporters, how would you construct that story? You know, where would, who would you be getting to try to say, let's make certain that people can hear all sides to this. And let's just say it's on the vaccine for a moment.
Speaker 4:Well, I think, I think my answer is the same in that you, you go to the X as expert sources as you can, but you always give the other side an opportunity to weigh in. Um, but I think the, the preponderance come down on the side of, uh, of people getting the vaccine, but I think we do need to always give people the opportunity to speak out. Um, however, I think a well-constructed story would speak for itself in terms of experts. So expert sources giving the information, but you would try to present in a well-rounded story and sidebars and graphics the data and sourcing that would let people make up their own minds intelligently. Okay. Not, not just presenting opinions, but presenting facts as well. I mean, it's not just enough to quote a doctor saying it's safe, but to also make sure that, that the information in the article is also presenting the data in a way that people can understand it. So that makes sense. It does, but let's go back to the use of the term alternative facts, which is know fascinating concept to me since there are either facts or there aren't, I don't know what an alternative back then. It's a better alternative fact is not the truth. That's just my opinion, but right. But it's so permeated our society right now that the notion is, well, that's not so in an article. Um, all right. So let me, let me, let's, let's give you another, let's go back to another example. My, my esteemed colleague, John penny, um, who presided room with a steam over our editorial page for many, many years. Um, we, we had a policy of, of, uh, running as many letters to the editor as possible. Um, and even a letter to the editor was an opinion. People would often try to cite as fact something in, in their letter to back up their opinion. However, we would research that fact to make sure it was true to make sure, so we would not mislead our readers. So unless we could, we or the writer could provide evidence that the fact that was being cited was in fact, true. We would run that letter or we would ask the writer to revise it. We always tried to write a letter, but if someone said the Holocaust didn't happen, that was not a wetter that would meet our standards. Got it. Okay. But, you know, that's an extreme example. There are many examples where people would take a little Liberty with facts and we would call them out on it in terms of you need to provide supporting documentation for us to run that letter. All right. So, so let me use the same thing. Would it be in terms of well vaccines cause um, vaccines cause autism, right. So if somebody was, you know, was why aren't you taking the vaccine or vaccines cause autism, well, can you show me proof of that before it's going to run in an article? You know what I'm saying?
Speaker 2:Yes. And, and in fact that was just brought up. I just heard that this morning, you know, as one of the reasons that people still resist the vaccine and yet the news story said, do you have any proof of that? And there's been no substance, you know, at least the, this news story is that there was no substantiation of the fact that the vaccine caused autism
Speaker 4:Or vaccines in general, that re that reporters seem to do his job. And, and so some people would probably say that, that, you know, people who had a predis predisposed opinion that vaccines cause autism probably were upset with that reporter, but truth of the matter, and most people who look at things down the middle would say, I see where that's coming from. All right. So you right
Speaker 2:From, you know, certainly your career was certainly in print media. Yes. So then social media, really, I think as you say, you use the right around the great recession as a point in time where things start to take off online. And I will say it's very interesting that, so there's, there's, there's Facebook, there's Twitter. There is a, uh, there's a podcast for everything. There is so much online information now it's not necessary or an opinion. And it's not necessarily the fact that you're looking for a lot of times, you're just looking for someone to reinforce your beliefs. But at the same time, Barry, it's very, you know, as someone who likes newspapers and sitting in my computer, I can now access newspapers all over the country. And
Speaker 4:Yeah. And let me just say, as a subscriber to newspapers, I still get articles on Facebook and Twitter prior to him getting them in the newspaper. And I never understood that. Why am I being, why am I being disadvantaged as a subscriber? If you know what I mean? That's one of the things that I don't think the industry has ever fully figured out. Um, I'm sure that believes that that drives readers to the newspaper afterwards. But if I've already read the article, that's one less reason to pick up the newspaper when it comes on Sunday. My personal opinion, I know I'm probably sounding like an old man, an old, the old man, but let me just give you a couple of quick facts here, um, to give you the kind of scope that we're talking about now, good net, which has 260 properties, right? Okay. The new get at as 260 property it's revenue in Q4, Q4 of 2020 was$115 million revenue by the way, took a loss on that. But nevertheless, it's$115 million. The New York times a success story has more digital subscribers than regular subscribers. It did$509 million. Sounds like a really good success story. And it is right, right.$509 million in Q4 revenue, Google
Speaker 2:$56 billion. Yes. How do you compete with that? And now what is it? Apple now has a news service completely digital,
Speaker 4:Right?
Speaker 2:And so is that where this is all heading post pandemic that, you know, are we again writing the epitaph of the print?
Speaker 4:I think the national newspapers, like the times and the wall street journal and the Washington post, I don't see them going anywhere for many, many moons. Um, whether the local newspaper survive in their current form. You know, I don't, I think people have been writing them off for years. I was asked years ago. Um, how well do you think a big Hep-C journal will be around and it's still around? It's not in the same form that it was when I was there, but when I got there, but it's still around. Um, but he was a little harbinger. I, um, taught a class at the Maris center for lifetime study. And, um, people started asking me questions about the Gipsy journal and there must've been 120, 125 senior citizens in this, um, in this, um, class. Now these are people who you would think of, um, would be loyal newspaper readers. And they asked me this typical question. Well, Barry, as the former publisher of the Poughkeepsie journal, how much longer do you think the Poughkeepsie journal will be?
Speaker 2:Now? This was four years ago or so. And then I said, well, let me turn this question around and ask you, how many of you still subscribe to the Poughkeepsie journal? Maybe 20, 20% of the hands went up, right? How many of you all farmer subscribers everyone's hand went up? Wow, that is four. That's quite telling, you know, Barry, I still get up Saturday morning because I am of that age that likes to turn the pages and see what's on the next page. And I, and also partially limit screen time. So I'll pick up the wall street journal. I'll pick up the, you know, like let's say it's Saturday. So that's my big day where it's the wall street journal, the New York times, the local Democrat, it's a regional, I'm familiar with it yet. Local paper and Sullivan County. Then I'll get the New York post, um, for another take on what's happening. And the end, the times Herald record for, you know, Duchess, Ulster and orange news. Now I come home, I'm all happy. I sit down to with, uh, you know, cuppa tea or something. And my 20 year old kids come in and go, what are you doing? What w w why, what a waste, you know, not, not only is it a waste of time from their perspective, but they look at it again, you're wasting paper, you're wasting, you're killing trees. What are you doing? And they're, they're going, I could, if it was news, I'd just wait for it to come up on my, uh, you know, uh, my, uh, CNN account on my Twitter feed or something else. And, and the same is true with me watching the nightly news at six 30, or I watch it religiously. Yes. But they look at me and go, why, why do you do that? What do you say to, you know, what, instead of your class of seniors, very, what would you say if it was a class of 20 somethings? I mean, I guess the issue is, is the content good enough? And is the delivery in a format that is convenient to the reader? I think that the, you can't stick to a delivery method that doesn't please the reader, and it's a young person does not want to read on fiber. You'd have to give it to them on cyber. Very, very, very well put, you know, because I think as I think about it, my two children are big fans of podcasts. They absolutely go to them to listen to, you know, the issues that are of importance to them. So they've grown up in a different era. And I hear I, sorry, but I find myself again, wondering is this the end? The New York times, Sunday edition keeps looking smaller. They had to invent entire new sections, the stay at home. What is the section stay at home? I think, right. Yes.
Speaker 1:I love that. I love it.
Speaker 2:It's full of ideas and recipes and ways that you could get through the pandemic. I thought it was very fair and I get three mini puzzles. You know, it's very clever, but if this, if a younger generation, because certainly my father started started me reading the New York times. And I, I probably, you could count on one hand the number of additions that I have missed in my entire life, but that is not true for younger people. No, not at all. And so, but, but it's got somewhere
Speaker 1:In there I'm wondering is there
Speaker 2:Is, is the key, and maybe they've got it right. That they can listen to so many sources in the way in which they want to, they can then formulate their own judgment. But I wonder going back to something you raised earlier, which is, are, they are each of these sources really doing fact-based journalism where they're really checking it because that's journalism one Oh one. And if you don't know the difference between that, then yes, you're, you can listen to fake news and alternative facts. I mean, it comes down to the content, has to be there for people to go to it. They're not going to read the Poughkeepsie journal if there's nothing in that, in it, the interest people. And if the content is still always geared toward middle age and older, there's no reason for a young person to go through. Right. Absolutely. So, okay. So rather than my pessimism, I'm going to ask a, a long time a member of this profession, what's your positive spin. Then on the future of media, in whatever format it is, how will
Speaker 1:I will, I will, I will frame
Speaker 2:It in a, in a prescription I think. Um, and that is that journalism that sheds light will eliminate. And that's a good thing. And ultimately people will recognize that and, and appreciate it. And it will ensure the future of journalism because it's essential to our democracy. And without it, I don't know where we'll be as a country. So I have faith that people will recognize that ultimately, Barry Rothfeld thank you so much for your time and joining us on patterns and paradigms. This is Jonathan trashcan, and I look forward to our listeners joining me in the next step.
Speaker 1:Thank you for tuning in to patterns and paradigms the pattern podcast. For more information about this episode, visit our website pattern for progress.org forward slash podcast.