Newspapers Today Where Railways Were Yesterday

Newspapers are where the railways used to be, not where they’re at today. At the beginning of the 20^th century railways had a virtual monopoly on long distance land transportation for freight and passenger. Then they gradually lost that monopoly to the motor vehicle and the airplane. By mid-century things had deteriorated so badly that many once profitable railways were going bankrupt. Since then there has been a remarkable turn around and the industry is once again very profitable.

Like the railways, at the start of the 20^th century newspapers had a virtual monopoly on the reporting of news. Ironically the very thing that initially helped newspapers has led to their current tailspin – the invention of the electronic media beginning with the telegraph. Radio hardly made a dent in newspapers. TV was the first to make a serious dent as it made news immediate and visual. The assignation of Lee Harvey Oswald demonstrated TV’s superiority for that. However newspapers were still quite profitable.

It was the coming of the Internet and sites like Craigslist, Kijiji and Facebook that turned a once profitable industry into a seemingly dying one by stealing the classified ads. Revenues are falling and papers are closing.

Things have gotten so bad that Paul Godfrey, CEO of Postmedia, came cap in hand to the House Of Commons Heritage Committee in May asking for government assistance of some sort. One MP, Liberal Adam Vaughan, accused Godfrey of seeking government assistance to bail out Postmedia’s considerable debt load. As of November 30^th its debt stood at $671.2 million

It would be very easy to ignore this if it was just Postmedia that was suffering, but it isn’t. The Torstar and other newspapers across Canada and the United States are also suffering. Papers have been laying off people, closing papers, losing advertising and losing readers for over the past decade as the Internet grows.

Thomas Walkom, national affairs columnist for the Toronto Star, argued in a column , that some form of subsidy, probably a tax break of some kind, is needed. Up to a point I agree, but even if adopted a tax break will not save the newspaper industry.

The newspaper industry, if it wants to survive, needs to follow the example of the railways. They turned things around by being innovative, changing the way they did things, speeding up service and becoming more customer focused. They also focused on their strengths and not on their weaknesses.

As I mentioned in a previous post, The Front Page Versus Harry Potter too many newspapers are still stuck in the past when print was king and not up today’s technological world.

Decades ago newspapers created press co-operatives, such as Associated Press and Canadian Press, to share the cost of covering news events and to sell and share stories among its members. In recent years these co-operatives have diversified and become more web based. Something similar should be tried with small classified ads to compete with the likes of Kijiji and Craig’s List.

Speaking of advertising, I’ve yet to see a grocery store ad whenever I visit a newspaper site. They keep trying to sell me cars and a lot of things I have absolutely no interest in, but not groceries. My free local weekly paper did not have grocery store ads, except the generic one for Walmart, until a few weeks ago when they’ve started carrying two stores. Hello wake up.

Paywalls are a mixed blessing when it comes to revenue. They bring in revenue at the cost of readers. The New York Times is probably the most successful passing a million electronic subscribers . However it is a global newspaper and most papers are not global, neither are they specialty. The Toronto Star put up a paywall and then took it down again.

Here again newspapers show a lack of innovation. Why not a site where people could subscribe to several papers instead of just one like the Globe & Mail and the Wall Street Journal or several local papers? For matter why not a service that would allow a customer to purchase a subscription to say local news in Southern Ontario or national, regional and local news or the environment and business or entertainment and sports? The combinations are potentially endless.

Is there hope for newspapers? Yes if they modernize and get creative. No if they continue on the track that most of them seem to be on now.

Goodbye Morley Safer

It was with sadness that read of the recent death Morley Safer, 84, who in his day, was one of the top journalists in North America and the world. He was also one of my favorite journalists. Safer had been born in Toronto, briefly attended the University Of Western Ontario, before dropping out to become a newspaper reporter. He worked for the CBC before being lured away to CBS in 1964. In 1970 Safer joined the fledgling 60 Minutes, then just two years old. The show was not yet the institution it later became. He announced his retirement from CBS about a week before he died. CBS aired a special on him a few days afterwards. Then he was dead. He was a dual citizen of both Canada and the United States. Morley Safer will be missed. Rest In Peace.

Here’s a link to an unorthodox obituary Safer

Windsor Star Still Stuck In The Past

I spoke too soon when I said that as a result of my previous post the Windsor Star had incorporated links. A check of several articles today showed no links. They are still VERY MUCH in the past, unfortunately.

Follow-Up To The Front Page Versus Harry Potter In The Newspaper Business

Probably as a direct result of my blog, the Windsor Star has taken a big step away from The Front Page style page towards the Harry Potter interactive paper. They still have a ways to go yet, but they’ve finally started on the journey and are to be commended for it.

My next blog will take a look at paywalls.

The Front Page Versus Harry Potter In The Newspaper Business

Newspapers remain caught between The Front Page and Harry Potter. The Front Page represents a time when newspapers were strictly print and Harry Potter a time when newspapers move and talk.

Like Eastman Kodak, who, despite inventing the digital camera, never quite embraced the digital age, so too are newspapers. They were among the first to embrace email, but never really the Internet. The only question that remains is will newspapers go the way of Eastman Kodak or will they finally learn how to survive in the digital age? The jury is still out.

Since 2007, the year Newspaper Death Watch was founded, at least 12 newspapers have folded, including the Halifax Daily News. Many others are having financial difficulties.

I recently read somewhere that newspapers bemoan having initially given away their online content for free and that is the main reason why they’re in financial difficulty now. I beg to differ. The problem was their websites were afterthoughts to the printed page. While website design has improved, too many papers still put their printed content online without much change.

A good example of two newspapers appearing to be going in opposite directions are the Toronto Star and the Windsor Star. The Toronto Star recently took down its paywall, while the Windsor Star recently put up one. Leaving aside the pros and cons of paywalls, the differences go deeper. The Toronto Star is gradually learning how to be Harry Potter, while the Windsor Star still appears focused on The Front Page.

Virtually every Toronto Star article has embedded links, while virtually every Windsor Star article doesn’t. The Toronto Star has lots of videos, including both printed and online video columns, and frequently has interactive displays. The Windsor Star has the odd video and no interactive displays.

An example from each paper will nicely illustrate the differences. The Toronto Star recently published an article on the long proposed downtown relief line to ease overcrowding on the Yonge Street subway. The article has two embedded links and an interactive map showing the five proposed routes for the relief line. You can look at all five routes together or click on each one individually. They don’t always get it right, but the Toronto Star is slowly learning how to operate in a digital environment.

In contrast the Windsor Star recently did an article on a deal to build new fire hall right next to habitat occupied by the threatened Butler’s garter snake. A snake exclusion fence is to be put up, but there is no illustration of it. The garter snake is one of over 100 threatened species in Windsor, but there are no links to further information on the snake or the other threatened species and no maps.

The Windsor Star isn’t the only paper in Canada or the United States that still doesn’t seem to know how to thrive in the digital age. The question for the Windsor Star and other papers is are you up to challenge of learning how to do it? Here's hoping they are.

The Fall Of A Once Great Television Station - CHCH TV

With sadness I learned of the recent bankruptcy of CHCH TV in Hamilton, Ontario. I grew up watching the station. Every Sunday afternoon, I think, my parents and I would watch Tiny Talent Time with Bill Lawrence, who also had a children’s TV show. It also had the Party Game, several call-in shows, Smith & Smith and the Red Green Show (an outgrowth of Smith & Smith), which started at CHCH before eventually moving to CBC. My favorite was the Hilarious House Of Frankenstein with Billy Van, which although I wasn’t a child when it ran, it was still fun to watch.

CHCH was founded in 1954 as am affiliate of the CBC. It dropped its affiliation in 1961 and became an independent station. The heyday of the station was in 1960s and 1970s, when most of the shows I mentioned, were produced.

The station lost its independence in 1990 when it was bought by Western International Communications or WIC. WIC in turn was bought by CANWEST Global in 2000. The next year CHCH was rebranded CH. It was rebranded again in 2007 as E. Less than two years later CANWEST looked at either closing the station or selling it. It was acquired by Channel Zero and reverted to being called CHCH. It basically became a news and movie network, plus some American tv shows.

At the time of its bankruptcy on December 11, 2015, it was reported that the station had been profitable up until about 2012. Then it began losing national advertising revenue, although local advertising remained steady, and the federal Local Programming Improvement Fund. Also it is very costly to produce local news.

To me CHCH began going slowly downhill in the 1990s when it started to cease producing great local shows of regional and national interest. I quit regularly watching it years ago, except occasionally for the news, which was very informative, but not great. It became ho hum tv.

If the station can survive and make a comeback, which I genuinely feel it can, it needs to distinguish itself from the other stations out there.  One way is to look at what led to its success in the past and made it must see tv. To me that was producing great shows that can be sold to other markets, as well as continuing to produce local and regional news. There they might want to look into expanding beyond Hamilton, Halton, Niagara and Brantford to perhaps include all of Southwestern Ontario. It also needs to inject some zest and some fun to it, which I feel it has lacked for many years now.

I wish them well and hope they’ll be around to celebrate their 70^th anniversary on the air.

The Myth And Undesirability Of The Paperless Office

The coming of the computer age was supposed to herald the paperless office yet many years later paper is still going strong. We seem to be using as much paper as ever before.

CTV reporter, Scott Lightfoot, did a report on this. It mentioned that some companies are concerned that digital records may not have the same permanence as paper. Joanne Mc Neish, from Ryerson University, said there is a link between paper and memory, which you don’t get with a digital record. One company mentioned in Lightfoot’s report said that they had gone almost totally digital.

At first glance going paperless seems to make sense. It saves paper and space. It’s also easier to copy and to access. As an environmentalist I should be thrilled as it means fewer trees cut down for paper and less waste and all the energy and other resources involved. A room full of electronic data houses more than a room full of filing cabinets.

However, overall going digital without saving a paper copy does not make good sense. For starters programs and storage formats change. When I computerized in the 1980s I had floppy disks with limited storage space. For a word processor I used WordStar. Since then I’ve used small hard disks, CDs and, now, an external hard drive to store data on. My word processor has changed to Word Perfect and now to Word. I do save data in both Word and ASCI, ASCI in hopes that I can continue to read it years from now.

Another problem with electronic data is that you need to keep two or more copies of it in two or more places in case something goes wrong with one storage medium. If you store your data in the cloud then you’re at risk for having data accessed by unauthorized persons. A magnet can easily erase most data.

Paper, while vulnerable to fire and flood damage, is more permanent. A flood can wipe out electronic data, but not necessarily paper data. Language may change, but you can always access the document if physically present. You can copy paper documents, but not as easily as electronic ones.

Another big advantage of paper over electronics is that paper can be read anywhere without a computer or electricity. All it requires is the ability to read.

Electronic data is all that environmentally friendly as it seems. Trees are renewable and you can recycle paper. With electronic data and storage there are the materials needed to manufacture the electronic devices needed to read and store the data, which are not renewable. Recycling is a much bigger issue with electronics than with paper. If you throw paper away say into a woods, while it looks messy, it will eventually disintegrate over a few months to a year or so. An electronic device thrown away in a woods will take decades and even centuries to disintegrate, plus there is the danger from the materials used leeching into the environment.

In short a paperless office is not the way to go.

How To Read A Medical Study

Earlier this year a study from the Institute Of Diet And Health claimed that eating chocolate helped you to lose weight. The problem was the Institute Of Diet And Health was fake, the study had only 15 participants and 18 different measurements were looked at. However, that didn’t stop the media from lapping it up, which was the whole point of the exercise to illustrate junk science.

Most journalists don’t know how to read a medical study. So to help them here’s a bare bones run down on how to do it.

One of the first things to look at are the authors of the study; how many, what are their credentials and are there any potential conflicts of interest? Closely related is how is the study funded? For example, if a drug company funded a study on a new drug they’re making the study will be likely biased towards a favorable outcome for that study.

Also please keep in mind that for FDA approval, which Canada tends to follow, a new drug must be shown to be not inferior to an existing drug. So if drug A is already on the market new drug B only needs to show that it is not worse than drug A. It doesn’t have to be better or have fewer side effects.

How many participants are there in the study and how many measurements are being looked at? A dead giveaway for the chocolate study was that there were only 15 participants and 18 different measurements were being looked at: too few participants and too many measurements. A study needs to have a reasonable amount of participants in order to be effective. There is no precise number below, which a study is ineffective, but a study should probably have at least 100 people. I’m a participant in a multi-year study that probably has tens of thousands of participants.

As to how many measurements a study looks at depends on how many participants. The fewer the participants the fewer the measurements. So a study with a 100 participants should probably look at no more than about three measurements. With a much larger study, like the Ontario Health Study, which will be looking at about 300,000 subjects over many years, you can look at a much larger number of measurements.

A study should define the background to what is being studied and describe the rationale for the design of the study. It should also provide details on who was included and who was excluded in the study and why, as well as the endpoints for the study (how long did it run).

Be very careful about the claims. One study I looked at said there was a 71% reduction in stent thrombosis when dual anti-platelet therapy was extended from the current 12 months to 30 months. Sounds very impressive until you look at the incidence. The incidence of stent thrombosis over 18 months is 1.4%, extending dual anti-platelet therapy lowers this to 0.4%.

Remember that one study does not necessarily establish a new treatment, diagnosis, prevention or other such thing. You need several studies showing essentially the same thing in order to be significant. When the link between smoking and cancer was first established, it certainly raised alarm bells, but more studies were needed to confirm it.

Abstracts do not always accurately reflect the summary of the study. Sometimes they make mistakes.

Finally always check Retraction Watch for retractions of studies or parts of studies. These are quite common so it’s a must to look at when reporting on a study. 

For further information on this subject see the YouTube video, Skeptical Journal Club: How To Read A Medical Study 

Verbal Sexual Assault Of Female Reporters MUST Stop

Let’s make one thing VERY clear, saying “fuck her right in the pussy” is NOT even remotely funny. It is a verbal sexual assault on female reporters and women in general and it MUST stop.

I hadn’t heard of the phrase let alone was aware that female reporters are being constantly bombarded with this until the Shauna Hunt incident. At first I thought it was some run-of-the-mill juvenile sexist remark that Ms Hunt had heard once too often. That would have been bad enough and is also uncalled for. However, when I looked up the phrase online (I only saw the initials at first.) I was floored and disgusted. I applaud Ms Hunt for fighting back and turning the tables on her tormentors.

According to various news reports the practice started as a result of a video uploaded to Youtube by a Cincinnati filmmaker, as a spoof. According to Catherine Porter, a columnist for the Toronto Star, it was part of a business plan. (See http://www.thestar.com/news/world/2015/05/12/verbal-sexual-assault-on-women-reporters-must-stop-porter.html) As the trend of interrupting live news reports by female reporters with the phrase took off, the filmmaker began selling T-shirts with the initials written on them.

A report in The Guardian about the Hunt incident says this sort of nonsense has been happening all the time to mainly female reporters in Canada, United States and the United Kingdom.  It reminds me too much of the so called men in India who try to justify violent sexual assault of women by blaming the woman. (See my An Irregular Heart blog post on this: http://an-irregular-heart.blogspot.ca/)

One of those who verbally assaulted Ms Hunt on live tv has been identified as Shawn Simoes, a then Hydro One employee earning well over $100,000 a year. His vulgar heckling has cost him his job and the freedom to attend sporting events at Maple Leaf Sports & Entertainment owned venues. Mr. Simoes, to his credit, has written a note of apology to Ms Hunt, which she has accepted. Another man involved with the stunt has also been apparently identified, but his name and occupation have not been made public.

While it’s too bad Mr. Simoes lost his job over this, one has to keep in mind the numerous women who have quit their jobs over sexual harassment. Recently a woman in the Canadian military quit over this issue. So far her tormentors have not been punished and are still free to torment and physically assault other women.

It gets down to respect. I wouldn’t, even in jest, say anything vulgar to my wife as I respect her too much to do that, let alone say it to a total stranger, live, on air to let the whole world know what an idiot I am. Until we all respect one another incidents, like this, will unfortunately continue to happen.

Toronto Star's Latest Venture Holds Hope For The Future

About 19 months ago, in August, 2013, the Toronto Star erected a paywall to improve its bottom line and allow it to improve services. At the same time Montreal’s La Presse launched an iPad app after having invested $40 million over two years. As a result La Presse has attracted a highly engaged younger audience who use the app for an average of 45 minutes a day and up to an hour on Saturdays. This is according to an article in the Huffington Post last November  http://www.huffingtonpost.ca/2014/11/05/toronto-star-paywall-gone_n_6106122.html

Toronto Star publisher John Cruickshank was quoted as saying, “These are numbers we haven’t seen in the digital world at all to date.”

The Huffington Post also reported that the Torstar had signed a deal with LaPresse to develop a new tablet product for the Star at a cost of up to $14 million.

Like most papers, the Star has seen revenue for print advertising decline. On a year over year basis ad revenues have declined 20.5%, which is quite a lot.

On March 7^th the Toronto Star announced in a “Note To Readers” that it was removing its paywall as of April 1^st http://www.thestar.com/news/gta/2015/03/07/note-to-readers-star-to-end-paid-digital-subscriptions-on-april-1.html#  It made the move after “extensive input from our readers and our advertisers.” Translated it means the paywall wasn’t working as well as they had hoped. (Ironically while looking at the note a message came up saying that I had 7 free articles left, out of 10, to view before I had to buy a subscription.)

The newspaper business reminds me too much of such failed companies as Baldwin Locomotives and Eastman Kodak. Baldwin was famous in its field as a builder of railway engines. Despite having pioneered in building railway diesel engines, it continued to focus on steam long after other builders had moved on. Kodak was the same in photography. It continued to concentrate on film, despite having pioneered in digital photography, and went bankrupt. Today it is just holding on.

The newspaper business is too much like these businesses. Newspapers pioneered in the use of the Internet and yet have failed to capitalize on it. Hopefully the Toronto Star’s new venture will succeed. We need the Toronto Star and we need newspapers.

Handling Rejections

Rejections. They come with the turf as a journalist, especially if you freelance, but there’s no way to avoid them, unless of course you are the boss. Even then your brilliant ideas might be rejected by your audience.

One way to handle a rejection is to take an AK47 or some other gun and shoot the bastard who rejected you. A good way if you don’t mind spending the rest of your life in jail or being executed and having a lot of people hate you. Or you could write a nasty letter or email to the bitch telling the person how brainless they are for rejecting you and your brilliant idea. That’s like blowing up both ends of a bridge with you in the middle. Another way is to just walk away from it all and never pitch an idea again. Yes that’s really showing them how not talented you are.

Rejections could and sometimes did ruin my day, especially if it was an idea that I had high hopes on and that I knew was a good idea. I’d often spend a day or two or three moping about and feeling sorry for myself. I would often fantasize about being a multi-millionaire and firing the editor or demoting them to a menial job. However, it was a good way to waste time and not accomplish anything.

Gradually I learned far better coping skills. I’d take an hour or two break and do something totally different, like play a computer game (My favorite was and is Railroad Tycoon.) or read or file. Sometimes, if a rejection hit particularly hard I’d take the rest of the day off and do something different, which might include a walk or a bicycle ride.

I also learned to try not to take rejections so personally. I learned to realize that it was an idea that was being rejected and not necessary me. Sometimes the editor themself might not know why they were rejecting the idea or reject it as they had reached information overload and were just wanting to get home. Sometimes the rejection might be that they have two people proposing the same idea, one they knew and one they didn’t know. They would go with the one they knew, which is natural. An idea might be rejected as you didn’t do your homework and they had just covered it or were about to cover it.

And let’s face it not all ideas are good and some are pitched at the wrong time to the wrong place or are good, but not pitched well. You then need to pause and rethink, which can be a very good response to a rejection.

Finally the very best response to a rejection is to just move on. Send out the query to a new publication or, if, upon reflection you feel it may not be so brilliant after all, send out a new query.

On Showing Respect To Various Faiths

With great freedom comes great responsibility. In the aftermath of the attack on Charlie Hebdo too many people seem to believe that because we have the right to do something they should.

As a Canadian citizen I have the legal right to cheat on my wife as long as it is with another consenting adult, but that doesn’t mean I should, especially if I truly love and respect her, which I do. That doesn’t mean that I believe we should enact laws making adultery a crime either.

Here in the West we have the legal right as people in the media to poke fun at people, including Mohammed, but that doesn’t mean we should. Most Muslims are upset and angry over the mocking of their Prophet and their faith. As a devout Christian I can understand and sympathise with how Muslims feel as people mock and poke fun at my Savior all the time, including Charlie Hebdo, and worse, they use his name as a swear word. So as a writer I will not turn around and mock or otherwise show disrespect to Muslims and people of other faiths, including atheism, as I want them to respect my faith.

As for the argument that defiantly putting a cartoon of Mohammed on the cover with the caption “Je suis Charlie” is an act of defending freedom of speech and freedom of the press, I strongly disagree. It is an act of unnecessary disrespect and provocation.

However, as strongly as I may feel about someone mocking and showing what I consider to be disrespect to my faith, that does not give me the right to murder them or their families and friends or total strangers because I feel they might someone be associated with those who offend me. Nor does it give me the right to threaten them or destroy their property. I don’t think making such behavior illegal is the solution either. Education and changing attitudes is. Just look at say the term “nigger”, which was once commonly used. Blacks educated people about it and gradually the term disappeared from public use without the use of laws.

However, the biggest concern I have with a legal approach to this issue is where would it end? People of all faiths could probably agree on some basics, but beyond that there would likely be major disputes. We’d also start crossing the line between respecting the faith of others and imposing a particular faith’s values on everyone else and on suppressing freedom of the press.

Bottom line is the press needs to be very mindful of the ethical implications of what we do.

The Invasion Of Corporate Journalism

Over the past decade or more an invasion has been taking place, one that threatens not only ourselves, but the ones doing the invading as well. It’s the creeping invasion of corporate journalism into the regular media.

                  In the United States (I haven’t been able to find and comparable Canadian figures. What little I have found suggests data is similar.) the number of journalists has declined 17% between 2004 and 2013, while the number of public relations specialists has increased by 22%. (see http://www.mondaynote.com/2014/09/21/brace-for-the-corporate-journalism-wave/) The median income for journalists is $35,600, while the median income for public relations specialists is $54,940. (see http://contently.net/2014/09/02/stories/public-relations-salaries-increase-journalism-salaries-cant-even-keep-inflation/ ) It’s no wonder then that as more and more journalists get laid off as the result of downsizing or newspapers folding that they are migrating to corporate journalism. Even those who still have jobs within journalism have been leaving seeing no future for them.

                  In sort of a mirror image of them, public relations and communications agencies along with a growing number of companies have been setting up fully staffed newsrooms, which mimic those of regular media. These newsrooms seek tell favorable stories about themselves or their clients.

                  So what exactly is corporate journalism and how does it differ from regular journalism. Regular journalism seeks to report on events and examine/investigate issues independently of businesses and other organizations, including government. On the other hand corporate journalism seeks to report on events and examine issues in a way that is favorable to business. Corporate journalism will seek to restrict access to information and individuals, while regular journalism will seek to get around this. When a bad event happens, corporate journalism will seek to downplay or suppress it.

                  There has always been a struggle between journalism and advertising. If you’ve ever read 19^th century newspapers you see this readily. There are ads that mimic regular news and regular news that amounted to advertising. In the 1920s most financial journalists were on the take. They were paid to write favorable stories about certain stocks. However, standards were evolved to try to keep advertising and journalism separate.

                  Over the years various organizations such as government agencies, businesses (railroads, airlines, insurance companies, manufacturers), museums and clubs have produced their own magazines for public consumption. All had an obvious bias.

                  Today things have gone further. In Richmond, California the local newspaper has been replaced by an online paper financed and run by Chevron Oil. It’s slick and polished and slants news in favor of Chevron. According to Grist, “...it’s a Chevron propaganda rag that’s run and written by the company’s flacks.” (see http://grist.org/news/chevron-creates-its-own-news-outlet-for-a-poor-city-that-it-pollutes/)

                  In September Money And Markets, the online newsletter of Weiss Research, complained about how Apple has the investment media eating out of its hands. The media just fawns over the latest product release from Apple and have become part of Apple’s marketing machine. I’ve noticed that even the non-investment media also seems to have been drawn into Apple. This is without Apple having to shell out a dime for such publicity. (see http://www.moneyandmarkets.com/journalists-addicted-apple-66027#.VI9JQGd0zX4)

                  Writing in The Dark Side Of Corporate Journalism, Arthur E. Rowse said, “Today’s media complex is drunk with economic and political power. Making money seems to come before making sense of the world.”

                  The downside of all this is that the media gets corrupted into being the mouthpiece of business (and government and organizations), undermining freedom of the press. Issues, like climate change, corporate donations and pay inequity either get ignored or downplayed as real discussion gets suppressed and fluff gets passed off as journalism.

This is not only bad for the public, but also bad for business. If only an approved view is what gets talked about weaknesses get brushed aside, which can ultimately prove fatal. One of the prime reasons corporate journalism tries to mimic regular journalism is that regular journalism is trusted and while businesses is not. Yet the process ultimately undermines the trust and credibility of regular journalism. What creates trust in regular journalism is freedom from outside interference.

                  Can corporate journalism and regular journalism co-exist? Yes, but not at the expense of regular journalism. I’ll have more to say on this in the future.

Getting Ideas

A problem many newcomers to journalism in all its forms have is where to get ideas? Ideas are all around all you have to do is catch them and refine them.

                  Ideas can come from your own life or the lives of friends and family or from complete strangers. They can come on your way to work, to the grocery store, while walking or cycling. They can come while lying in bed or in the shower. Ideas can from virtually anywhere.

                  I remember once reading an article in Writer’s Digest about Joyce Verrette,  who got the idea for her bestselling novel Dawn Of Desire from a dream. The idea for The Scarsdale Diet, another bestseller, came from a few lines in either a newspaper or a magazine and turned into a best seller Herman Tarnover and Samm Sinclair Baker. Other writers had read that same article and ignored it. T.v., the Internet, even movies can be another profitable source of ideas.

                  An old standby for more than one magazine was to sit down with a newspaper and go over it. They’d get hundreds of ideas. I managed to get a few ideas myself this way. Thanks to reports in some regional papers, I was one of the earliest to report on the quagga mussel and the round nose goby, both invasive species to the Great Lakes.

                  Other ideas come from personal experience. Over the course of 15 years (1995-2010) I was on and off caregiver for my parents when first my mother and then, after a 5 year break, my father came down with probable Alzheimer’s. That led me to article on Alzheimer’s for Canadian Living in 2008. Naturally, when I received the assignment, my father’s condition worsened making writing it even more of a challenge than I expected.

                  Some ideas come from going about your everyday business. I recall one writer, who regularly passed equestrians, I believe. One he stopped to talk to them and eventually turned it into a specialty. While out cycling one day I saw a river otter and another time, while walking my dog near my home, saw a beaver. I turned these sightings into a couple of news items on returning species.

                  My interests have been another source of ideas. I turned my love of postcards into a few articles and my love of trains led to numerous articles over the years and eventually to becoming a contributor to Trains Magazine for a while before bowing out.

                  So open your eyes and ears and be ready to jot down an idea or two or three. You’ll be surprised at what you might come up with.

Through The Valley Of Dispair - Suicide

Why do people, like Robin Williams and Matthew Warren, who seemingly have everything going for them commit suicide? And journalists are not immune from this either. Ernest Hemingway committed suicide as did a young t.v. journalist, who did so live. Basically they were all mentally ill in one form or another. And mental illness is as real as a broken bone, Alzheimer’s or heart disease.

I know as I was suicidal from age 8 to 43 and still have the occasional suicidal thought.  As mentioned in a previous post I have what is now known as attention deficit hyperactivity disorder. I had difficulty focussing, was immature, impulsive, hyper-energetic and anxious, among other things. I developed a track record of failure at school, in making friends and in coping with life.

I was constantly criticized by my parents, teachers, classmates, my church and others. I was punished a lot at school by the strap, by standing out in the hall, by writing lines and at home by being beaten with a belt, not to mention being physically and emotionally bullied. I pleaded with my mother to praise me for the one thing I did right and not the nine things I did wrong, but she never would. 

I was sent to a variety of psychologists and psychiatrists, most of whom needed professional help themselves. One of them was arrested for something two or three years after I last saw them.

I was hurting so much that by age 8 I was asking God to take my life away. It’s not that I really wanted to die, but rather I just wanted the pain to end. So how did I manage to turn things around and what can you do to help someone in a similar situation?

Fantasy was a big help initially. Later it became a crutch. In my fantasies I was successful, I was the hero, I righted the wrongs done to myself and to others and I got the girl.

I took steps to get out of myself by taking day and overnight trips and by becoming active in the community. This boosted my self confidence and helped give me a sense of purpose and accomplishment.

Writing was both a help and a hindrance. It was great to be published, but frustrating as I really needed structure to succeed and freelancing doesn’t provide it.

I went from being a high school dropout to being a university graduate with an overall average of 74%, higher than anything I was ever able to accomplish in public school. However I was not able capitalize on it and soon fell into a cycle of hope and despair.

Caring for my parents, both of whom had probable Alzheimer’s helped to break the pattern as it forced me to think outside myself. An even bigger help was meeting my wife, who gave me encouragement, guidance and acceptance. She helped me to realize that just because someone is angry with me doesn’t necessarily mean they hate me, just my behavior.

Last, but not least my Christian faith has been a big help and comfort to me, although the church and most Christians have not. My faith gave me a sense of acceptance and belonging. After all if God can accept me and love me in spite of myself, then so can I.

However, none of this would have worked if I hadn’t been willing to change, albeit somewhat reluctantly at times. I have also never been one for holding grudges or seeking revenge and I usually managed to keep a sense of humor.

I still have the occasional suicidal thought, which I overcome by thinking of things I have be thankful for, like my wife and having enough to eat. I also distract myself by such things as going for a walk or reading.

While I have not sought professional help as an adult in retrospect I probably should have and kept at it until I found the right therapist. Aside from taking Ritalin as a child, I have not taken any medication due to bad reactions and as I haven’t needed it. That isn’t to say that some might find medication very useful.

I’ve learned to be patient with myself. Change takes time and effort. I reward myself occasionally for positive change. I’ve found looking at myself in a mirror and thinking or saying out loud positive messages helpful. Smiling even when I haven’t felt like it, is a surprising help.

If you suspect someone maybe suicidal ask them. If they aren’t you won’t be putting the thought into their mind and if they are you asking them just might save their life.

And by all means, if you feel you can, befriend someone who is suicidal and/or mentally ill. It could be good for both of you, but check your motives and know your limits. Do not let the sick person dominate you. Be encouraging, be patient and keep a sense of humor. And if you’ve bitten off more than you can chew don’t walk away and not take action. Try to get the person some help.

While I still struggle, I’m a happier, more relaxed and more stable person than I have ever been in my life.

A Writer's Reference Library

What’s in your reference library? There are basics that we should all have, like dictionaries and thesauruses. Beyond that it depends on our own individual needs, specialities and tastes. If you speak and write in more than one language you’ll probably have reference books to reflect that. Alas I only speak one language.

In my library I have six dictionaries: five American and one English, plus two combination dictionary/thesaurus, one American and one Canadian. Dictionaries are among my most used books. I also have five straight thesauruses. A thesaurus comes in very handy when you’re at a loss for words or rather tired of using the same word or words over and over again. J. I. Rodale’s The Synonym Finder is or was supposedly the largest, most comprehensive thesaurus then in print (1986).

One of my favorite reference books, which I recently acquired, is The Barnhart Concise Dictionary Of Etymology: The Origins Of American English Words. I’m fascinated by the origin or words, as I mentioned in a previous blog. From time to time I pick up the book and just look through at the various word origins.

And no journalist’s reference library would be complete without good old Strunk & White’s The Elements Of Style. It’s a small little book, which packs a lot of punch. For example it has sections on using the active voice, omitting needless words, placing yourself in the background and words and expressions commonly misused, like “Thanking you in advance.”, unique and farther, further.

About 1987 I bought Funk & Wagnall’s New Encyclopedia at IGA. It came out two or three volumes at a time. It was fun collecting them as I soon discovered that sometimes one IGA would have some volumes that other IGAs didn’t have yet. Today all the IGA stores I bought the encyclopedia at are closed. I also bought for a time the annual year books as well the two volume dictionary, which is still heavily used, and the atlas. I still refer to them from time to time and still prefer a physical set of encyclopedia to an electronic set.

When my local library owned it, I used to periodically borrow A Treasury Of Great Reporting edited by Louis L. Snyder and Richard B. Morris. While published in 1949, it is still a classic book on reporting with the earliest example dating from 1587. Surprisingly it does not mention the Titanic or the assassination or the Archduke Franz Ferdinand. However, it does cover the American civil war, World Wars I and II and numerous other stories. It is chiefly American focussed with a few English stories.

Other reference books I have for writing include: various versions of the Bible,  Elmore Leonard’s 10 Rules Of Writing, The Huffington Post Complete Guide To Blogging, Facing The Line: Writers On Life And Craft, The Business Writer’s Handbook Ninth Edition, James J. Kilpatrick’s The Writer’s Art, The Handbook Of Good English and another old standby H. W. Fowler’s A Dictionary Of Modern English Usage, which although dated (The edition I have came out in 1952.) is still very useful.

On The Origin Of Words & Phrases

As a writer I love words. I find them fascinating although, I confess, I am not crazy about Scrabble. It stems not only from my being a writer, but being a not so great speller, my interest in dinosaurs and my love of history. I have 14 dictionaries and thesauruses in my library. This includes a recently acquired The Barnhart Concise Dictionary Of Etymology: The Origins Of American English Words.

A favorite word of mine as it has a nice sound is “hooligan”. It origins seem somewhat unclear. The Barnhart Concise Dictionary Of Etymology reports that it may have come from a fictional Irish family named Hooligan in a music-hall song of the 1890s. Webster’s Ninth New Collegiate Dictionary claims it comes from Patrick Hooligan a thief living in London in the 1890s. It may also have originated with the name of a London street gang of the 1890s.

Whatever its origins it has come to mean, according to Wikipedia http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hooliganism “...a person, usually young, who belongs to an informal group and commits acts of vandalism or criminal damage, starts fights, and who causes disturbances but is not a thief.” It also refers to violence in sports.

Here’s one word I was surprised to learn how old it was – humankind. I thought it was a fairly recent invention, but apparently it dates from 1594, according to the online version the Merriam -Webster’s Dictionary http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/humankind Other sources give a later date of 1635-1645 from the phrase human kind.

A phrase I’m interested in since it involves my name is peter out or petered out. According to The Phrase Finder (http://www.phrases.org.uk/meanings/peter-out.html)  the phrase originated as a mining term in the mid 19^th century in the United States. It’s earliest known use is in an article in the Milwaukee Daily Gazette, December, 1845 about an old prospector whom was comparing his dwindling life circumstances with his diminishing finds of lead sulphide. The site says there were other records of the use of peter to refer to dwindling mineral reserves in the 1840s in the United States.

The site discusses several possible reasons why peter was used in mining of which a reference to saltpeter (potassium nitrate) they believe is the most likely.

Some words have stayed the same, but the meaning has changed. One of the most notable is “gay”. Gay originally referred to joyous or merry, but has since, at least in North America, become primarily associated with homosexual.

The word man has undergone a similar change. Originally it meant all of humanity, but has since come to mean just male. Originally too man had prefix in front of it to denote a male, but only woman has retained its prefix. An article on IO9 (http://io9.com/5962243/think-twice-before-using-mankind-to-mean-all-humanity-say-scholars) mentions how quickly the use of man has changed. In the original Star Trek series in 1960s said, “to boldly go where no man has gone before”. Twenty years later in the revised Star Trek the phrase had been changed “to boldly go where no one has gone before”. This was not a reflection of political correctness, but rather of changing meaning. There are still some people today who insist on using the term “man” to mean all of humanity, but for the most part that meaning of the word is now archaic.

It is this changing and introduction of new words and phrases and meanings that continue to attract me to the language.

Goodbye Magazines

Is it time for writers to give up on magazines? A growing number, including myself, think it has. In a nutshell many feel they’re not worth the hassle and the low pay.

                  When invented in the 19^th century magazines were cutting edge. They were a step up, so to speak, from newspapers. They provided a more in depth look at various subjects. They educated people about Some specialized on certain subjects. For example when the electric railway industry blossomed a century ago trade journals were created for it providing useful news and information. They were also a place where novels were serialized and provided an outlet for short stories. Today, for the most part, this is long gone.

                  In the 20^th century one thinks of such great magazines as Punch, National Geographic, Life, Mc Calls, to name a few. Here in Canada we had Saturday Night. Macleans and Chatelaine. Magazines were a must read. Today magazines, like newspapers, are under siege from t.v. and the Internet. Simply put magazines are not keeping up, although they certainly are trying.

                  From a writer’s point of view magazines have gone from good to bad to horrible. Where to start? Well the pay hasn’t increased since about the 1960s or maybe the 1970s and yet demands on writers have. Most magazines now want all rights and some are demanding a waiver of moral rights and they aren’t paying for these extra rights. Prior to this writers could make badly needed extra money by selling an article to one magazine and then turning around and selling it to one or two or even more other magazines. The acquisition of all rights kills this. Most contracts in the past were negotiable today they’re take it or leave it.

Some publications pay on publication, which leaves the writer stuck if they don’t run it, as two such publications did with me. Try going into a store and taking something, like a stove or even a bag of chips, and saying I’ll pay for if I use it. Some magazines are now passing on some of their costs to the writer, without increasing the pay, like, for example, demanding that you cover them in the event of a lawsuit.

                  Then there are the insane things some magazines do. Writer’s Digest, which proclaimed itself the leading magazine for writers, for years had a one or two page rambling form rejection. This continued after one writer did an article on the check list form rejection.

                  Too many magazines talk down to writers, like calling the writer by their name, but signing their reply with something like “The Editors” or “Editorial Staff”. Another way is for some to use a condescending tone, treating a professional writer like an idiot.

                  And how do you deal with this? I queried a magazine I’ve written for several times proposing to do a piece on the 100^th anniversary of the extinction of the passenger pigeon. The editor told me it would be more appropriate for their online site, whose editor told me it would be more appropriate for the print magazine. Scream!

                  Then there was one editor who wrote an article for a major writer’s magazine complaining about the poor writers he was dealing with. However, when I checked out the magazine I found they paid poorly, demanded all rights and paid on publication. In my view the editor got exactly what the magazine deserved.

                  This isn’t to say that writers’ are perfect. We aren’t. Even the best of us make mistakes, as do the best editors. And there are too many amateurs, in the negative sense of the word, who are willing to write for free, who fail to study the publication and who can barely put two sentences together.

                  What is badly needed is a good shakeup to bring magazines kicking and screaming into the 21^st century. Pay needs to be substantially increased, contracts need to be made more equitable to the writer, writers need to be treated with respect and a system of cultivating new quality professional writers needs to be put in place. Until that time comes writers will continue to abandon magazines and content will suffer.

Drawing The Line

Legend has it that at the siege of the Alamo in Texas Colonel William Barret Travis drew a line and asked all those who were with him to cross it, while the rest could leave. Only one man had the courage to hang back and leave. As journalists we all must know when to draw the line and when to hang back rather than cross it.

Hopefully one line where we’ll hang back is when a potential employer wants us to work for no or very little pay. I used to hear a lot about these work houses where writers were invited to bid on a project with the obvious objective to pay the writer as little as possible. Hopefully they have gone away, but somehow I doubt it.

There are others who will ask writers to work for nothing, while everyone else gets paid. Here’s a link to Harlan Ellison http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mj5IV23g-fE on paying the writer. Ellison rightfully says that too many amateur writers who are willing to write for free undermine the professionals.

Hopefully we’ll hang back on employers who treat us shabbily, who demand all rights for little pay, who pay on publication and who demand that we reimburse them in case of a lawsuit. Generally speaking these are amateurs and if we’re trying to be professional we should ignore them.

Hanging back from other lines very much depends on our own values. As a Christian I won’t write for pornographic publications or those which deny the reality of climate change or who are outright anti-God. In writing I won’t take God’s name in vain or use Christ’s name as a swear word. I also won’t use such words as nigger, Paki, fagot or fatso as they are very disrespectful. In fact I generally avoid swearing, except if I were to quote someone. However, I don’t consider the term “bull shit” to be swearing or using the word “shit” instead of euphuisms like “pooh” or “defecation”. To me these are fluffy nonsense.

As webmaster of Peter’s Place Of Freelance Journalism I take bigger liberties than as a writer. Why? For one thing my site is aimed at all journalists and not just those who consider themselves Christian and for another if I limited it to just those media that upheld to certain restrictive values I’d probably end up with just a few hundred links instead of a few thousand. So therefore I include links to pornographic publications, those that promote freer sexual values than I hold, to publications that pay on publication and demand all rights. I also link to media promoting other faiths, including atheism.

This isn’t to say that there aren’t some media where I’ll draw the line and hang back from. There are. I will not knowingly link to media that out and out promote satanism, racism, pedophilia or are anti-environment.  I also will not knowingly link to any extremist media.

The bottom line is all of us as journalists must know our own lines to hang back from otherwise we fail both ourselves and our audience.