Oberholzer and her staff went as far as to blame the lack of funds for The Plainsman’s weak news coverage during the past year:
Every week we hear conversations and receive calls from students who do not feel we are adequately serving them as a news outlet. We hear people asking each other why we covered event X instead of event Y. … We feel this decline in coverage isn’t because of a lack of effort from the students who come in weekly to volunteer for the publication, but because of the failure of the business side of the newspaper to generate revenue.
We have lost confidence in the current management of the business side to reverse this dangerous trend. While these are hard economic times, we believe new management of our business operations is needed now. It is because of this belief, we feel our general manager should be replaced by those who hired her.
Click to enlarge
As a former editor-in-chief of The Plainsman (2006-2007), I’m beyond appalled that this staff would sacrifice its integrity in the name of such bullying. Not only is this editorial an abuse of the newspaper’s power, it’s downright libelous. The staff is lucky that Jan Waters announced her retirement this morning, effective March 31, or they could have been facing a long uphill battle.
To use the newspaper as your own personal battleground is unethical and unforgivable. Oberholzer and her staff violated the one unspoken rule of journalism: Keep your dirty laundry to yourself. You can’t expect the public to have faith in you if you can’t handle your own personal business.
For years, editorial staff members have harbored irrational hatred toward the students who sell ads for the paper. They have scoffed at special sections (the money-makers at any paper), and have blamed decreasing page counts on lazy and incompetent advertising executives. Papers across the country, including my paper, The Huntsville Times, are having to cut pages and reduce expenses. The Plainsman is no different.
It’s disheartening to see journalism students so narrow-minded. The staff has not even come close to taking advantage of all of its resources. The paper’s Web site is rarely updated and is missing the most essential of features: photo galleries, calendars, videos, audio and interactive pieces. It’s updated once a week, and it’s simply an exact copy of the print edition. The personal blogs are just that — too personal to attract an audience.
One of my coworkers said this type of behavior is “worse than making up a story.” It reflects negatively on the entire industry, and tarnishes the paper reputation. I’m always been concerned about The Plainsman’s demise, but more so now than ever. Not because of decreasing revenue, but because of the editorial staff’s refusal to take some of the blame.
When I first came to The Plainsman, it was the second-most award-winning newspaper in the country. The staff talked about the good ol’ days of Bill Barrow, Lee Davidson and Rheta Grimsley Johnson. Reporters dreamed of taking down corrupt trustees and incompetent presidents, hallmarks of The Auburn Plainsman. Its reputation as an aggressive student newspaper continued to linger, while the staff’s journalistic drive continued to languish.
The glory days are gone. The Auburn Plainsman is now nothing more than a newspaper too caught up in its past to see its future.
Bravo, Niki.
Seriously. Excellent work.
My sentiments exactly.
Niki, you say it very well.
I was saddened when I saw the paper & Web site. Had they even tried to illustrate their attempts to innovate and adapt to the realities of their world, that could have made the argument better. Sadly, we are all left wondering if they actually have tried to innovate and adapt.
Still, to publicly attack someone over in-house machinations, well … it just comes off as shallow.
Thank you for writing this and sharing. War Eagle!
Niki, I agree very much. I think you’ve said it very well. Reading this editorial and seeing the placement (above the flag? Really?) just gave me a sinking feeling in the pit of my stomach. I hope you’re doing well in Huntsville.
That’s so childish, and it only makes them look like whiny children. I agree with Robert– it appears they haven’t learned to adapt to the changing face of the world right now, especially the economy. My understanding is that several big newspapers have cut significant amounts of jobs lately, probably due to a decrease in advertising revenue. The Plainsman is not going to be immune to that kind of contraction. They need to learn to utilize the resources they have in a better way– write more stories, print shorter versions in the paper, and offer more content online possibly?
And the bit about covering “event X instead of event Y?” That has nothing to do with space. That has to do with not sending your people where they need to be. They need to work within their means, think outside the box, stop placing blame and start writing news. An editorial, especially one that attacks the paper’s own staff, should never run on the front page. Why couldn’t that space have been taken up with coverage of Events X and Y?
I could not disagree with you more. And to tell the truth you are just as much as the problem as Jan was. Bravo to the current staff for doing the right thing and getting rid of the good ole’ boy system that seems so prevalent in that state. What a way to start the process of making this historic college paper relevant and responsible again. Jan let so much happen there. For instance, I was let go because I was struggling financially and had to drop down to a part time student paying my own way through college. So then editor April Jo Love fired me with Jans approval because she didn’t like me. Yet she brought in Jason Blakeney, who was also a part time student. Doesn’t that just seem a little contradictory? [...] Then she had other people fired that stood in her way. [...] The truth is people like Jan let this happen. That sports section went from interviews with Tommy Tuberville and Jeff lebo to pictures of Jason’s dad in an Auburn hat that read “Jason’s dad reads the plainsman” or something to that affect. So bravo to the plainsman staff, dig deeper on Ms. Jan Williams, you’ll be surprised what you might find and how deep it really goes. Enjoy copland in a sleepy little town. I love Journalism, but I am no longer in it because passion doesn’t pay the bills, but for a select few. So I have no problem letting the truth come out. I for one wont let an irresponsible person like yourself, pretending to be a journalist fool people anymore.
As our industry is continously bombarded by claims of biased and slanted coverage, that a new generation of would be journalists would turn the front page of a well regarded publication into a device for personal attack makes it a sad day for those in the business of informing people of the news. Hopefully, those with the desire to be journalists and those who are already in the industry will learn from this.
In terms of journalistic fail, this rivals the monolithic house ad…
I am slightly enthused that they chose to acknowledge the elephant in the room: the paper is dying. But this is laughably awful.
I am a former staff member of The Plainsman, and I would have to disagree with the comments being left by former staff members. You cannot on one hand say it’s fine to point out the faults and unethical behavior of individuals like Bobby Lowder, and then on the other hand say it is wrong to criticize unethical behavior happening within your own office. While it is true that bad management “happens” that still does not make it excusable or worthy to be ignored simply because the person is on “the paper’s” team. If a major crime is committed by a staff member, is it not supposed to be reported simply because they are part of “the team” that is The Plainsman? While I disagree with the level at which this editorial was published (above the flag, front page) and the lack of blame placed on the editorial side, the overall message seems to be that the manager has been making unethical appointments to the business side which is not effecting the revenue of the paper. Hiring individuals with no or little advertising experience is reason for concern. Imagine if individuals were hired on the editorial side based on friendships over credentials? “A Spirit That Is Not Afraid.” Right? Well this took some serious spiritual nonfearful guts.
I recall the same thing happening on the editorial side not so many years ago. Individuals SHOULD be hired due to their credentials and experience. When this DOES NOT happen it seems to cause conflict. Whether the blame can be laid on that lack of experience or not is no longer the focal point. The fact that someone holds a position that they shouldn’t have in the first place becomes the focal point. I know that their are individuals on the business side that have no business being there just by staying in contact with current AU students, AU alums and professors.
It’s about time The Plainsman started to look at the behavior of those inside the office. The last good editor of The Plainsman held office in 2004. That’s my personal opinion (And no, I was not part of that staff). Every since then there has been failure at the head editor spot, which has led to the environment we see today. Hopefully this will be the start of a new, revived Auburn Plainsman.
Sometimes pointing out the injustices taking place on The Plains can start in your own newsroom. As I understand it, while being editor you did not act in the most ethical ways yourself Ms. Doyle. Of course, that is only rumor so I decline to elaborate on what flows through the grapevine. However, I do ask that former staffers stop placing your loyalty to the paper over what is really happening behind those close doors.
Funny, “Former Staff Member” has the nerve to throw up rumors about your lack of ethics but doesn’t have the balls to use their name. Gutless cowards should keep their opinions to themselves.
With that said, What planet are these kids from? Don’t they realize that every newspaper is struggling? What makes them immune from the economy and the internet? I think the Editor and her entire staff are an embarrassment to not only The Plainsman but Auburn University as well.
[...] background, see my earlier post and The Plainsman’s [...]
[...] previous blog entries about this: The Auburn Plainsman’s slow demise: Who’s really to blame?, Another take on The Plainsman’s [...]
Nice job Niki. Just like everyone else in this society it seems that Ms. Oberholzer wants to find someone else to blame for her problems.
Niki,
Thank you for finally saying what needs to be said. What the staff of the Plainsman did was uncalled for. In a time that bonds between the editorial and business sides need to be strengthened, the staff, in this case, only burned a bridge. No staff should ever act like this. As another person said earlier, this column is “laughably awful.”