One of my editors at the Sun-Times once asked me, "Roger, is it true that they used to let reporters smoke at their desks?" This wasn't asked yesterday; it must have been ten years ago. I realized then, although I'm only writing about it now, that a lifestyle had disappeared. When I entered the business in the autumn of my 16th year, newspapering seemed the most romantic and exciting thing I could possibly do with my life. "But honey," my mom said, "they don't pay them anything." Who cared? It involved knowing what was going on before anyone else did, and putting my byline on top of a story telling it to the world. "Roger Ebert" is only a name. "By Roger Ebert" are the three most magical words in the language, drawing my eye the same way a bulls-eye attracts an arrow.
In the way some kids might be awed by a youth gang, I was awed by admission to the fraternity of newspapers. I adopted the idealism and cynicism of the reporters I met there, spoke like they did, laughed at the same things, felt that I belonged. On Saturday nights about midnight at The News-Gazette, when we put the Sunday paper to bed, we gathered around the city desk, tired, released, and waited for the first papers to be brought upstairs. Ed Borman, the news editor was in the slot; Bill Schmelzle, the city editor, had Saturday nights off. Borman would crack open a six-pack. I tasted beer for the first time. I was a man. My parents, my family, my friends at school, nobody, would ever really understand the fellowship into which I entered. Borman didn't care that I was drinking at 16. We had all put out the paper together. Now we would have a beer.
I went to work for the Chicago Sun-Times in 1966. I walked from the Illinois Central Station up Wabash Avenue, under the L tracks, and saw the building looming on the opposite bank of the Chicago River. A boat was moored at its dock, and a crane was off-loading huge rolls of newsprint. I was assigned a desk in the back row of the city room, in the corner by the window. We shared the floor with the city room of the Chicago Daily News, where Mike Royko occupied the corresponding position.
At about 8 p.m. on New Year's Day of 1967, only two lights on the floor were burning--mine, and Royko's. It was too early for the graveyard shift to come in. Royko walked over to see who else was working. A historic snowstorm was beginning. He asked me how I was getting home. I said I'd take the train. He said he had his old man's Checker car and would drop me at a train station. He had to make a stop at a 24-hour drugstore right where the L crossed North Avenue.The pharmacist was backed up. "Come on, kid," Royko said. "Let's have a drink at the eye-opener place." It was a bar under the tracks so cramped the bartender could serve everyone without leaving his stool. "Two blackberry brandies and short beers," he said. He told me, "Blackberry brandy is good for hangovers. You never get charged for a beer chaser." I sipped the brandy, and a warm place began to glow in my stomach. I had been in Chicago four months and I was sitting under the L tracks with Mike Royko in an eye-opener place. A Blackhawks game was playing on WGN radio. The team scored, and again, and again. This at last was life.
"The Blackhawks are really hot tonight," I observed to Royko.
He studied me. "Where you from, kid? Downstate?"
"Urbana," I said.
"Ever seen a hockey game?"
"No."
"That's what I thought, you asshole. "Those are the game highlights."
A newspaper city room was a noisy place to work. Dozens of typewriters hammered at carbon-copy books that made an impatient slap-slap-slap. Phones rang the way phones used to ring in the movies. Reporters shouted into them. They called out "boy!" and held up a story and copykids ran to snatch it and deliverer it to an editor. Reporters would shout out questions: "Quick! Who was governor before Walker?"
There were no cubicles. We worked at desks lined up next to each other row after row. Ann Landers (actually Eppie Lederer) had an office full of assistants somewhere in the building, but she insisted on sitting in the middle of this chaos, next to the TV-radio critic, Paul Molloy. Once Paul was talking on a telephone headset and pounding at a typewriter and tilted back in his chair and fell to the floor and kept on talking. Eppie regarded him, reached in a file drawer, and handed down her pamphlet, Drinking Problem? Take This Test of Twenty Questions.
When you went on an interview, you took eight sheets of copy paper, folded them once, and ripped them in half using a pica stick. Then again. Now you had a notebook of 32 pages to slip in your pocket with your ball-point. You had a press card. You knew the motto of the City News Bureau: If your mother says she loves you, check it out. You were a reporter from the Chicago Sun-Times.
Yes, they allowed reporters to smoke at their decks in those days. Also drink, if they could get away with it. Reporters sent Milton the Copyboy out the loading dock and under Michigan Avenue to Billy Goat's, to fetch them a drink in a paper coffee cup, accompanied by cream and sugar as camouflage. Copyboys were known as wise-ass insiders with an angle on everything, but Milton became a legend. It was rumored that he might be harboring small quantities of retail marijuana on his person. He occasionally engaged reporters on deadline with his opinions about large questions dealing with being and nothingness. He had been a University of Chicago student and still lived in Hyde Park. That explained everything.
It looked so tall when I first saw it (Photo by Dan Price)
One day an inspector from the Chicago Post Office came to our editor, James Hoge, with a puzzling discovery. Several hundred empty envelopes addressed to Ann Landers had been found in the trash behind an address in Hyde Park. With an eerie certainty, Jim called in Milton and asked him for his address. Milton, whose jobs included distributing mail, had been stealing the quarters sent in for Ann Landers' pamphlet, Petting: When Does It Go Too Far? Discussing his firing after work at Billy Goat's, he was philosophical: "Hundreds of kids can thank me that they were conceived."
Billy Goat's and Riccardo's. That's where a lot of us headed after work. Billy Goat's was a dive so subterranean that after you were already on the lower level of Michigan Avenue you had to descend another flight of stairs. Prices were rock-bottom, too. Riccardo's was a good Italian restaurant at the other end of the block, facing Rush Street, with a bar shaped like an artist's palette and paintings representing the arts, including one by the famous Ivan Albright, who among other distinctions was the father of Jim Hoge's wife, Alice. A tall, mournful guitarist and a short, cheerful accordion player circulated playing a limited but perfectly-chosen repertoire.
It was believed that when the original Riccardo's future wife walked into the bar and asked where she should sit, Riccardo told her: "On the floor." His son, an actor, took over the operation and lived above the restaurant. When he sold the restaurant, he was interviewed by our Pulitzer-winning columnist Tom Fitzpatrick. He said that he'd enjoyed running the restaurant, except, "On Friday nights, they let the animals out of the zoo." My pal John McHugh, a Daily News reporter, studied this and said, "Ebert, he means us."
July 20, 1969: Editor Jim Hoge and reporters watch the moon landing in our City Room
There were true characters in those days. My first assignment was working on the Sunday magazine, where I met Jack McPhaul, a pipe-smoker who had been a reporter since the dawn of time. He did the reporting that inspired the movie "Call Northside 777." His book Deadlines and Monkeyshines was about legends of Chicago journalism. My favorite story was about the day they placed a historical marker under the stands of Stagg Field at the University of Chicago, where in 1942 scientists initiated the first controlled nuclear chain reaction.
Honored at the ceremony was the physicist Enrico Fermi. Our paper's photographer arrived late. He said to Fermi, "I got a great idea for a panel of photos across the top of the page. First, you're puttin' in the atom. Then, you're splittin' it. Third picture, you're lookin' at the pieces."
Then there was the day Art Petacque and Hugh Hough won the Pulitzer Prize for their coverage of the Valerie Percy murder case. Hough was a superb rewrite man. Petacque was our mob reporter. I don't know if anybody ever actually saw him typing, but he had great sources. He even knew all mob nicknames of the top Chicago mafioso. If it was rumored that he sometimes invented the nicknames himself, nobody ever complained. What was Joey (The Clown) Lombardo gonna do? Write a letter to the editor complaining that his real mob nickname was "the Joker?"
Petacque and Hough were a familiar team in the city room. Petacque would walk in looking like the cat who ate the canary, take a chair next to Hough, pull out a sheaf of notes, and start whispering in his ear. Hough would type, stopping occasionally to remove his cigar and say, "You're kidding!" Then Hough would write up the notes, and the story would appear under a shared byline, often on Page One. The day they won the prize, Hough was on a golf course. Petacque walked in, got a standing ovation, climbed up on a desk, bowed, and said, "I only wish Hugh Hough was here to tell you how happy I feel."
March 2, 1978: Publisher Marshall Field tells the Chicago Daily News staff of the decision to close the newspaper (all art clickable)
I was appointed film critic by Bob Zonka, the new features editor, who became my best friend, mentor, and father figure. To call him beloved would be an understatement. At his funeral, Jon Anderson, a former Daily News columnist, said: "I know for a fact that half the people in this room think they were Zonka's best friend." Anderson, who had been married more than once, added: "I spent more hours talking with Zonka than anyone except my three wives. And more quality time than with anyone."
Zonka's desk was just in front of mine. One day he was leaning back with his feet up, surveying the city room, and said, "Ebert, you're single. Why don't you ask Abra Prentice out on a date?" She was a tall, beautiful brunette, currently famous because while she was covering the Richard Speck trial, the nurse-murderer never took his eyes off of her.
"She's not my type," I said.
"Ebert, my boy," Zonka said. "When you grow up, you will learn that a Rockefeller is everybody's type."
"Huh?" I said.
Abra married Jon Anderson, and together they wrote a gossip column at the Daily News titled "Jon & Abra." When they left to found Chicagoan magazine, the column was renamed "Mort" and inherited by a political press agent named Mort Edelstein. "It made me feel creepy when our space was taken over by Death," Jon told me. I don't believe Jon was including Abra his remarks at Zonka's funeral, but I may have the dates confused. In any event, Jon and Abra have both long since been happily remarried.
Studs Terkel and Mike Royko at the Goat's
Yes, she was a Rockefeller. Better than that, Abra was a reporter. Once when Jon and Abra and I were visiting London at the same time, we made a deal: I would buy lunch, and they would buy dinner. Lunch would be bangers-and-mash in a pub. Dinner would be in a place with no prices on the menu. One night after dinner we were riding in a taxi through Soho and passed the famous Raymond's Revue Bar.
"Jon," said Abra, "I've never seen a strip show. Why can't I see a strip show?"
"Abra," Jon said, "As you know, you can."
We dismounted, only to find that the Revue Bar was closed on Mondays. Another taxi was idling by the curb, with a driver who touted us. "Evening, mates! Want to see the best strip show in town?" We did. As we were being hurried along dark and twisting lanes, Abra said, "This is the very thing they warn tourists to avoid. Isn't it exciting?" As I say, she was a reporter.
We entered an obscure doorway and descended two flights of stairs to a large neon-lit room with a small stage and a couple of dozen tables. It was explained that this was a private club, and it would cost us five quid to become members. Jon paid up. We were given a table in front of the stage, and ordered our drinks.
"Do you have an account?" asked the waiter.
"Oh, we're members," Abra told him. "Jon, show him our card."
"Yes, madam, but we do not sell alcohol by the drink. Members maintain their private stocks."
Jon ordered bottles of Scotch, vodka and champagne. We wondered if we could take them home with us. There was a three-piece band. A stripper materialized and began to disrobe a yard in front of us. Abra's eyes surveyed the shadows of the room.
"Dodger," Abra said, "why are all those men sitting alone at their tables?"
"I think they are lonely," I said, "because they have to buy a girl her own bottle if they want her to sit with them."
"They all seem so sad," Abra said. She took another look around the room. The stripper finished and left the stage to desultory applause. Abra whispered something to Jon. He was a tall, distinguished Canadian and knew how to handle these things. He rapped on the table with a pound coin. "Waiter!" he said. "Blow jobs for everyone!"
Such, such were the days. But I stray. I intended to describe the electricity in the news room when a big story broke. The moon landing. The resignation of Nixon. The death of Mayor Richard J. Daley. The time when an L train derailed, and we could see it from the office window. The afternoon when Jay McMullen, then the Daily News City Hall reporter, later married to Mayor Jane Byrne, commandeered the paper's suite at the Executive House across the river, and phoned the office to tell us to check out a balcony on the 17th floor. There he was, the phone to his ear, waving to us, standing next to his girl friend. They were both stark naked.
A. J. Liebling once wrote, "Freedom of the press belongs to the man who owns one." Not quite right. It also belongs to the people who produce one, even if they do smoke at their desks.
We have heard the chimes at midnight, Master Shallow.
¶
Mike Royko at the Goat's, 1982. (Video by Scott Jacobs)¶
LeRoy Anderson's "The Typewriter Song"
¶
And the whole building would tremble
¶
The article made me feel like I was there, good reminiscences always do that, congrats, love your style. Ciao, Mary
As a kid I always wanted to be a reporter. I wanted to be Jane Russell, and later Holly Hunter in Broadcast News.
Great piece of history.
I wonder how the shift in the work environment is effecting the way that news is gathered and reported. I feel as though we're moving towards the era of Edison Carter, the reporter from the futuristic "Max Headroom" TV show. Armed with a camera capable of putting a live feed into the TV network, he communicates with an editor/producer but her chief involvement is to say "Be CAREFUL, Edison!" and/or push the button that dumps his feed into the network broadcast. Mostly he's a fully independent reporter/producer.
I'm writing this on my little netbook. As it happens, Kodak sent me a little HD camera that was just released a day ago and it's on the armrest of this chair. Edison Carter's method of newsgathering and reporting has come true. I can shoot a story at noon, cut it together into a fairly professional video package right here on the netbook in iMovie, and have a story on the SunTimes.com site accompanied by YouTube or HD Vimeo video inside of fifteen minutes. And if my editor wants to say "Be CAREFUL, Andy!" she has to do it via email.
See what I mean? There's no buzzing, frenzied hive of human activity around me. If I wanted to, I can be an absolutely one-man-band, publishing and "broadcasting" completely on my own without ever having to defend or justify my work to anybody but the readers.
I wonder if that diminishes the "collective voice" of a newspaper. Hell, in nearly ten (proud) years as a Sun-Times columnist, I've been in the actual newsroom only three or four times. The worst-case scenario is that a newspaper becomes nothing more than a collection of freelancers united by a common accounting department, I suppose.
On the plus side, when I do fall out of my office chair, there's nobody to laugh.
Ebert: I picture those old 24-hour newsrooms filled with people working their butts off, and I think: "Okay, America, if you let newspapers die, who's going to tell you what's happening? A bunch of bloggers? Are they known for fact-checking? Objectivity? Having editors? Getting off their asses?
Your beat doesn't require you to leave home. Likewise the book and TV critics. At least I still have to leave the house to see most new movies. For now.
This is why I hate the internet, you can't romanticize it.
God, this is a wonderful piece. I feel privileged that I was able to get a small peek into this world as a copy-kid in the summer of 1985, not long after the typewriters had been displaced by rudimentary computers and the wire photos had started to be faxed in on a line of machines for us kids to trot to the appropriate editor.
This and more of the same in book form, please? Soon?
My first newspaper job was at the "Gainesville Daily Register," a reporting gig I got because I was already writing film reviews there -- an action inspired by ... guess who?
But while there, I had one of my greatest workplace exchanges ever. I was discussing writing with soneone, and managing editor Jerry Prickett walked by.
"Jerry," I said, "Do you believe in the active voice or the passive voice?"
His face was blank. Jerry always sort of mumbled when he talked. "I believe in America." He left the room.
Ebert: Newspaper stories. I remember the day Nixon resigned. Emmet Dedmon, then the editor, bounced through the city room, chortling.
"They're eating their hearts out across the street at the Tribune!" he gloated.
"Emmet?" said Zonka.
"Yeah?"
"Who did we endorse both times he ran?"
As much I believe in the power of the blog, I also believe in the power of the press and am greatly concerned about its demise. Who is going to assume the mantle of investigative journalism without bias? Blogs, in and of themselves, by definition tend to express the beliefs and emotions of their owners. Newspapers, on the other hand,(or at least the good ones)should be striving for unbiased reporting with equal treatment for both sides of a story, as well as the background that brought it to our attention. The great Pulitzer stories do this without exception. Who will do this when newspapers have become extinct?
Thank you for sharing these memories, Roger. I came along a few years after you did -- I was 4 when they landed on the moon -- but I can remember pica poles and proportion wheels and the time I said "Stop the presses!" AND THEY STOPPED. I love the Internet but it's not the same.
Ebert: Proportion wheels! I hated them. At The Daily Illini, I'd just asked a photog, "Print it two columns and tell me how deep it runs."
I envy you. I want to work as journalist, (film critic) but it seems the way of the newspaper is coming to an end. By the time I get out of college, the paper may be no more. All I'll have is the Internet. Well, hopefully that's not true, but it may be.
I worked at a mid-sized paper in the mid to late 70s. Started as a junior in college. Late-night shift, morning paper. Reporting the late-breaking police stuff because no real reporters wanted to work then.
My ace (assistant city editor) was one of the best newspapermen in the business. He was relegated to the late shift because he drank a lot, and knew a fair bit more about the business than the higher ups. We made a great pair, and I learned how to be a real reporter. Also learned how to close down bars, for that matter. Last call usually lasted at least an hour, in the gritty bar next to the newspaper.
The first time I met him, he barked, "Great legs. Great boobs." Different time, then.
I learned important stuff from him. Also, some stuff not so important, yet - somehow - necessary. The date that Ernie Pyle died. (April 18, 1945.) No whistling in the newsroom. (Bad luck.)
I got out of the business before cubicles. But cubicles were coming - they were visible in the distance. I knew they'd kill newspapers. The kind of mind that embraces cubicles is not free enough to run a viable newspaper. You need the excitement, the information exchange, that you get from reporters interacting, shouting at each other from across the room.
Of course, it's possible that cubicle minds didn't kill newspapers. Maybe too many people whistled in the newsroom.
Ebert: I love good kickers! Plant the notion, then pay it off.
Another superstition, the opposite of the City News motto: "Never check a great quote twice."
Roger, what was it like to have a boss that is also your best friend?
Also, I would like to add that that these were some of the best 10 minutes I have ever spent.
Ebert: In the 1960s, during the craze for posters, we started running a two-page pullout poster every Sunday. I had to write 300 words "supporting" it. It was a poster, for chrissakes. It supported itself.
One day I was deep into writing a thumb-sucker and Zonka ordered up 300 words in support of Rock Hudson.
"I'm working on something serious here," I complained. "Who gives a shit about Rock Hudson?"
"Ebert, I am your general. When the general says 'march'--march."
Hello Mr. Ebert,
Coincidentally I have also read your former television co-host Richard Roeper's entry about his job as a journalist. Your entry did not end the way his did, but overall both of you focused on your respective careers. Did you have any idea he had written an entry on a similar topic or is this just a coincidence? Either ways, I can tell that the two of you love your jobs as journalists very much and I will continue to read your entries during my leisure time.
Roger,
When I was 16 (1991), I worried about getting out of the tenth grade. You must have been a very ambitious kid to be going into the newspaper business at 16. Nowadays, one needs a college degree or two (actually 2) to begin their professional lives.
I very much believe that newspapers are a thing of the past, and nobody in the near future will be able to work for one. Much is now available for us to read on the internet, whether it is a political story or a movie review. I think people are finding it easier to sit at their laptops and get the latest news about the economy or to read thousands of movie reviews than to either hop into their cars and drive to a supermarket to get a newspaper, or subscribe to a paper. Why spend a few bucks on a one year subscription to a paper when you have plenty of articles available to you for free just by pushing a few buttons on your keyboards?
Your reasons for loving La Dolce Vita and wanting to work for newspapers seem to be the same. I was recently watching the appearance that you and Gene made on Bob Costas in 1989. You explained on that show that you were a loner who read a lot. I had the feeling your childhood was similar to mine. I too was a loner who read a lot. Your statement about being a loner obviously meant that your life was not very exciting. So you went into newspapers thinking that it would not only make your life interesting, but that it would free you from the boring G-rated innocence of youth. You desired a life that was a little sinful and certainly more adventurous.
Putting Citizen Kane aside (a film you saw 75 times by 1989), what do you think is the greatest film about newspapers or the newspaper industry?
Ebert: "All the President's Men," or, in a completely different way, "Sweet Smell of Success."
Mr. Ebert;
I have been anticipating this post since I first started reading your blog all those months ago. It was much better than I had hoped for.
The front page of today's Boston Globe reads "Times Co. threatens to shut Globe, seeks $20m in cuts from unions."
It seems it is only a matter of when not if newspapers stop printing. But they had a good run. Times change. News will be delivered. Talent will thrive. But it is clear that we the people are now our own editors.
Finally a message to Hollywood. "Mad Men" meets "The Naked City" meets "The Front Page". Ebert just wrote you a treatment. Send producers to Chicago pronto!
No Movies Mr. Ebert. Please go for the series.
Your loyal reader,
NHBill
Thank you for writing this Mr. Ebert. It nearly brought me to tears. I don't know why. Having received my degree in English I have come to realize that no writer, and I there are a lot to choose from, has so captured my attention and thrilled my emotions as you have. We may share a passion for cinema, but when you write articles like this it makes me wish I could go back in time with you. I can't help but feel as if those photographs are alive. Thank you for casting your line back into the past of the glory of journalism, and Chicago, which I just visited for the first time last month. People say the romanticism of it all is falling by the wayside. Through recollections such as this the romanticism of it all lives forever. Thank you. I hope I can find the best damn job in the world someday as well.
Hey, Ebert
WHy don't you tell the stories of how you were a loud mouth drunk, insulting everyone? Maybe you should tell how you were nothing but a lout, a boor, and a bully? You are as phony as a three dollar bill. You spent your whole life treating people like dirt, now you want us to go back in time with your phony, baloney romanticism? Eat dirt you low life.
Ebert: Thanks for that! It felt for a moment like I was back at the Goat's.
Catching a late night showing of "His Girl Friday" made me want to be a reporter. But I couldn't decide if I wanted to be wiseacre Cary Grant or tough as nails Roz Russell. My first and only newspaper job was as an intern at a Vermont paper covering the dairy and maple syrup beat (yes, there are such things in Vermont.) I since descended to lower careers: television, advertising and even, these days, blogging! But I still cherish my brief newspaper days. Thanks for the memories.
Ebert: The maple syrup beat? Of course. I once labored in sweltering heat under the grandstands at the Champaign County Fair, typing down the first, second and third place ribbon winners, plus two honorable mentions, in such categories as pickles, preserves, needlework, flower arrangement and Funny Vegetables.
I don't know, Roger, as someone whose "beat" has consisted of mostly sitting on your ass, that's pretty harsh. ;)
Besides, can you honestly say that the mainstream newspaper business acquitted itself well during the Bush years? So much of what we actually learned about the last administration's misdeeds came from the world of blogging that I don't think your dismissal is valid. Granted, there were some exceptions, but the vast majority of newspaper types now seem to be the "go-along-to-get-along" sycophantic types who serve as politicians' stenographers rather than intrepid defenders of democracy.
PS Re: editors: Did not Andy Ihnatko, regular columnist for the Sun-Times whose comment elicited yours, use "effecting" in that comment when he should have written "affecting?"
Ebert: He also contributes who only sits on his ass. Ask an airline pilot, or the Buddha.
five years ago vocational rehabilitation had the idea that i should try and write for the local paper, the Sarasota Herald-Tribune. they gave me a tour of the newsroom. It was a day that a verdict of a big local trial was coming down; the room was abuzz; I got to meet the editor of the paper who had ALS. It was decided I was to write a piece on the fifteenth anniversary of the Americans with disabilities act. And so I went to work. It took me a month to put together a 2000 word article. When the day arrived for my piece to be printed I couldn't find it in the newspaper. I looked and looked and finally found it ....in the letters to the editor section.
It broke my heart..
Exactly my point (I say from the comfortable perch of my ass)! You didn't respond to my question about newspapers' performance in the Bush era, however...
On the subject of the Buddha, did you hear about his trip to NYC?
I agree with NH Bill, write a screenplay for a drama or documentary about the end of the daily.
You arrived early enough to cover it with an experienced eye.
Do it before someone less worthy does.
Hell, all you do is type all day anyway, give us something that will stand the test of time.
Looks like you pissed someone off in your drinking days! So, were you an obnoxious drunk back in the day? Or don't you remember?
Ebert: All drunks have their obnoxious episodes. I always drew a full house at my annual New Year's Eve party at O'Rourke's Pub.
If this guy was 21 when I stopped drinking, he is 51 now. Sounds like he was a charmer back in the day.
Lots of comments here worrying that newspapers will be completely replaced by the internet. I worry that the survivors will become a shadow of the internet, and it won't matter.
Many of these are trying to economize by dumping political cartoonists, reviewers, investigative reporters, and columnists. In other words, all the folks who provide original content, who make one paper different from another.
If a once-great paper survives by becoming a paper-and-ink aggregator for the wire services, providing the same content as Google News (but a day later), why bother?
I don't want to be right about this. Someone, tell me why I'm not.
I'm a seventeen year old wannabe screenwriter/director who hasn't done more than a few 3-5 minute high school/YouTube productions here and there, as well as some goofing off with my camera with friends around the block, but I’ve really been itching to get something serious off the ground by constructing a feature length script to direct and buddies keep telling me I'm too young and inexperienced, "Your teen years are a time to chill and hang out as much as possible before getting a job becomes important", is what they say .
I’m trying to learn as much as I can but those "how to write a screenplay” books don't help much; they usually view things from either a very generic perspective to a hugely different/personal one. Though your story as a teenager who found a way, offered at least something I could relate to, so I’ve always been interested in your take on the fun and pain of creative screenwriting.
Sometimes I feel like Charlie Kaufman’s twin brother from "Adaptation". Reading those darn help book's, constantly battering me with the clichéd, "always practice" tip, I know It's true, but I wonder, is there any advice you can give to an aspiring writer that isn't (as much as I love doing it), "write, write, write?"
Yeah, I know that’s not all those books say but it's all that really sticks to me, not that dull formatting jumbo. The real Kaufman himself once said in an interview about “Synecdoche, New York”, something along the lines of, "If painting has no rules, why should screenwriting?” I could use that rebellious attitude; being thrown headfirst through a windshield isn't something I would like to anticipate.
Ebert: Getting a job may not be important as a teenager, but finding your vocation is. The best jobs are the ones you would do for free because you love them. I know mechanics, cabinet makers, surgeons who are like that.
In early films made for yourself I would not worry overmuch about structure or screenwriting rules. If you're meant to do it, it will happen. I never outlined a "paper" in my life. I would write the thing and then hand in an outline based on it. In some sense each shot, certainly each scene, suggests the next, or at least a narrow range of possibilities. Better to discover your feelings about composition and construction.
If you are absorbed and content at every moment while directing a film (I do not say "satisfied"), just keep on going and look at the result to see what it tells you about yourself.
In my last comment I failed to tell you how much I appreciate these blogs, they're the best on the net, by far, never disappointing and always filled to the brim with the most interesting and informing, philosophies, facts and opinions of my day, keep it up, you're a great inspiration to all of us Mr.Ebert.
And of course I meant Rosalind and not Jane.
Ebert: Or Bertrand, I suppose.
The fifth season of "THE WIRE," the Greatest Show in the Entire History of Pay Television, has as its focus the decline of the newspaper, a perfect subject for the show's creator, former Baltimore Sun reporter David Simon. While you would surely be lost coming into the show so late in regards to characters that have been established four seasons previous, I know you would really enjoy the performances of Clark Johnson as the City Editor and STATION AGENT director Tom McCarthy as a reporter who's adding a little too much spice to his stories, as well as moments like the nitpicking about how a building, and not people, can be evacuated. It even features the great H.L. Mencken quote about journalism as "the life of kings," something I'm shocked you did not include in this fine essay.
Ebert: "As I look back over a misspent life, I find myself more and more convinced that I had more fun doing news reporting than in any other enterprise. It is really the life of kings."
Have you read his "Newspaper Days?"
Watching the Royko video, got me thinking of baseball and the passing of time. Fifty years before you joined the Sun-Times, a young columnist for the Tribune wrote a ditto for the April 20 edition, the date of the home opener for 1916 Cubs. He was mourning the loss of the Cubs old digs, where the Cubs had won their LAST world series in 1908. Ring Lardner called it, "Elegy in a West Side Park."
Now fades the glimmering landscape on the sight.
save for the chatter of the laboring folk
Returning to their hovels for the night,
All is still at Taylor,Lincoln,Wood, and Polk.
Beneath this aged roof, this aged roof, this grandstand's shade,
Where peanut shucks lie in a mold'ring heap,
The Cub bugs used to cheer, moan, and weep.
This new home would, of course, come to be known as Wrigley Field, but the cheers, the moans, and, yes, the weeping would long continue-I still haven't completely recovered from the September 1969 debacle, the worst disaster in Chicago history, save perhaps 1871 Chicago Fire...enough trauma, in fact, to make even the sanest Cub fan a bit buggy.
Oh well,I would like to think that the future holds a place for the newspaper and that the curse of the Billy Goat would somehow be lifted, but what do I know.
Finally I used to see you around a lot at various local constabularies back in the much lamented "day." You were always cordial to me and my crew. The only people we ever saw you get pissed at were the boors and assholes that would occasionally mess with you, much like the jerk who commented earlier. Fuck him.
Ebert: It's something like discovering the Lardner poem that reminds me of why I love this blog.
"Constabularies." I like that.
Reply to: One night after dinner we were riding in a taxi through Soho and passed the famous Raymond's Revue Bar. "Jon," said Abra, "I've never seen a strip show." The Revue Bar was closed on Mondays...We entered an obscure doorway and descended two flights of stairs to a large neon-lit room with a small stage and a couple of dozen tables."They all seem so sad," Abra said.
There's a lot of background here. "Paul Raymond" was the alias of Geoffrey Anthony Quinn, He changed his name when he tried to break into showbusiness as a mind-reader on Clacton pier at the age of 22. He was listed at #62 on the Sunday Times Rich List in 2004 and valued at £600 million, The Evening Standard reported that he left behind an estimated fortune of £650 million, including a Soho real estate empire.
The Revuebar closed on June 10, 2004. Under another owner, it became a gay bar and cabaret venue called Too2Much. It hosted Elton John and David Furnish's lavish pre-wedding party. In November of 2006, Too2Much changed its name to Soho Revue Bar. The launch party included performances by Boy George, Anthony Costa, and Marcella Detroit.
Reply to: message to Hollywood. Ebert just wrote you a treatment. Send producers to Chicago pronto!
Reply to: agree with NH Bill, write a screenplay for a drama or documentary about the end of the daily.
Reply to: No Movies Mr. Ebert. Please go for the series.
First, television has become a vast wasteland. Six commercial breaks every hour destroys any possibility of suspense or even a coherent story line. TV has been reduced to (a) comedies with sex-oriented one-liners and (2) lab techs running tests that can be inserted at any point in the investigation.
Movies... are the art form of choice.
Seth Rogan is playing "The Green Hornet" as a newspaper publisher with a Butler, Kato, who knows a dozen forms of martial arts. Not much meat in that sandwich.
OK, let's try this one. Newspaper publisher knows his paper is losing millions every year. Dreams of leading an employee buy-out. Buys a date with a beautiful escort lady for a thousand dollars. She checks the messages on her Blackberry, then asks him to buy a Powerball ticket with a specific set of numbers. He does. She offers him a decision. If he agrees, his ticket will win the jackpot, over $200 million, on the condition that he buys the paper. She says her "backers" have chosen a set of numbers that haven't been bought yet, so he won't have to split the jackpot unless someone happens to buy the same combination in the next 8 hours. He'd never heard even a rumor about the Powerball drawing being fixed... but when he investigates recent winners, he sees a pattern. Instead of retiring to play golf, many recent winners invested their winnings by buying companies that seem to follow a pattern.
Certainly not the only possible story line, maybe not even the best one. But... the Internet has changed the rules of the game. I spent an hour finding out why Conrad Black was sentenced to six years in prison, and who owned the Soho strip club you mentioned by name... and you can't do that with a newspaper printed on paper.
The major problem with most strip clubs... is the money winds up in the owner's pocket, and the performers barely make enough to cover their rent. The founder of Raymond's was "Britain's richest man" with a fortune worth hundreds of millions of dollars, maybe even a billion. Strippers don't have enough leverage to hold out for higher salaries, or medical benefits.
As you said, no one knows if bloggers check their facts. There's no "great Internet authority" like The New York Times, but there could be. Right now, internet surfers reject the "ad clutter" that devalues prime time television and, yes, newspapers. I used to take the Sunday Los Angeles Times, but the inserts weighed twice as much as the printed pages.
Ebert: I never made it to Raymond's, but the Windmill in Great Windmill Street looms large in my memory, and inspired one of my favorite reviews:
http://rogerebert.suntimes.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20060112/REVIEWS/51213005/1023
Ok so when I was growing up there were 2 (maybe more) newspaper deliveries at our house every day....the Sun Times in the morning and The Daily News in the afternoon.When I went away to college I got too immersed in the hippie scene my freshman year and ended up at what we jokingly used to call MIT (Mayfair in Town). I got involved in the college newspaper there and for lack of competition was promoted to Feature Editor. Guess what, the feature editor got to go out on all the interviews the bigger college news papers go into. So I interviewed Rock Hudson (he was promoting Pretty Maids all in a Row). He was so cool, he stretched out on stage and smoked and let us ask any questions we wanted, also Mary Travers, she told us about a new song writer named John Denver who had written a great anti war song called Leaving on a Jet Plane. And many more celebrities. I was hooked! I ended up winning a journalism award and straight A's not only in journalism but all my classes which allowed me to raise my GPA and get into NIU where I majored in Journalism and worked at the local college radio station. I remember our "J" teachers always said get at least 3 sources! Now I have worked on both sides of the press, writing and advertising...and in my early never the twain did meet. Now of course editorial does advertising in many ways (feature stories on businesses who advertise etc.) When the "monkey Business" scandal broke journalism forever changed from a serious business to a scandal seeking business. 24 hour news channels further eroded serious journalism in search for enough news to fill 24 hours a day. I am sad to see hard copy newspapers failing. I remember the excitement of going to the press room and watching all those newspapers wind their way around the presses....we could feel the rumble in the advertising room. But I think in the future we will have new newspaper entreprenours (sp) who will start out slowly with local newspapers and good reporting and work their way up to dailies with scaled down features and fluff and just report to a public who deserves to have serious journalists write the stories. thanks for letting me rant but I miss the good old days....Royko, you, Siskel, Bob Greene, Ann Landers, KUP, and all the people in our lives who thought we mattered enough to tell us the truth....not press releases.
Ebert: Dear Kup, who told Dick Cavett his most thrilling experience as a newspaperman was "my audition with the Pope."
I've been to Chicago 2 times in my life, once in 1989 and later in 2007. I truly had no idea the situation that newspapers were facing in the US until my latest visit when I expected to find the Chicago Sun Times building at the same location I left it at the first time. only to find the new Trump Tower being built. A few days later I was walking on my way to the big train station and just when I was a couple of blocks from there I inadvertely found your newspaper's new location, right in front of the very same river except in an area much farther from the lake where the water is obviously not as clear.
Somehow I don't believe next time I visit, the Tribune will be at its magnificent location either. For all I know it isn't there anymore.
Your narration sure make those days sound like golden days but at the end of the day, the important thing for us your readers is the quality of your end product which is and, I suspect, will be just as good as ever in the future. Thanks.
Dear Mr. Ebert,
Abra called you "Dodger" and I was wondering if you had a story about that. If I had to guess, then I would say it was because it rhymed. Another way to look at it is that she told Zonka to tell you she liked you and you dodged at the opportunity. Judging from the story it seems to have all worked out for everybody.
Ebert: My pal McHugh calls me "Roger Dodger." Just seems to follow, I guess.
This is for Hector.
Stephen King has written some fine books on writing. If memory serves he starts with "read, read, read" then "write, write, write"
"The World According to Garp" is a wonderful novel about writing. ...and sex ...and marriage ...and oh well you're going to have to check that one out.
But right this minute re-read Mr. Ebert's marvelous post. Can't you hear the noise? Smell the smoke? The ash trays? The bar? and those fabulous characters! Hector, Mr. Ebert has just provided you with a master class. I saw Diana Krall on Letterman last night. I feel the same way after watching her as I did after reading today's post. "Gee ...I wish I could do that!"
Great comments as always, Mr. Ebert. I wonder if the cycle will be broken. These are not in chronological order,but I'm thinking:
They said radio and records would spell the end of the symphony
They said "talkies"would spell the end of the play
They said TV would spell the end of radio
They said TV would spell the end of the movie theater
They said videotapes would spell the end of the movie theater
They said cable would spell the end of the movie theater
They said CD's would spell the end of radio
They said video stores would spell the end of the movie theater
They say the internet means the end of newspapers and magazines
All those other formats are still around, and have found a niche. Will newspapers and magazines do the same or become museum pieces?
Ebert: I hope they'll stay around. But they'll never be the same.
This piece is almost like if Henry Hill from "Goodfellas" were a reporter rather than a gangster ("As far back as I can remember I always wanted to be a reporter"). Your vivid memory and the passion in your words is a great lesson for anyone trying to find what it is they were meant to do in life. Great job (in speaking of the career your chosen and the work you've done on this article).
My boy scout troop was given a tour of the Sun-Times Building (now the site of Trump Tower) when it was brand-spanking new in 1957 or 58. I remember it being quite a hyper-kinetic operation. Lots of activity and noise, especially the clattering of the typesetting machines and the rumbling of the presses. Enormous rolls of newsprint were shipped in on barges. Many of my classmates in highschool wanted to be newspaper men, just as you did, Roger. These were the most intelligent and literate kids in the class and, not surprisingly, published the high school paper. I also knew a number of students in college and graduate school who aspired to be authors, whether in fiction or non-fiction. Their plans were to start at some level in the editorial office and climb the ladder from there. Apparently, many are called but few are chosen, because I have never seen any of their names attached to a by-line or a cover page over lo these many years, er, decades. You were one of the lucky ones, my cyber friend.
Plus you got to rub shoulders with Royko and Studs Terkel! What a privilege that must have been. What was Royko like, *really?* It always got me that the Clintons claimed to idolize him but he pointedly stiffed them when they invited him to the White House. Did he think they were phonies or was he a closet conservative? There must have been some animated conservations between Royko, an uber Cubs fan, and Terkel, a loyal White Sox fan. (Go Sox!)
Maybe you didn't intend this, but you just wrote the eulogy for the newsroom. Even if newspapers weather this current storm, they'll never look like you described them again, smoking at desks or not.
I am not yet 50, but I started in the business in 1982 at age 22 and have paid the bills as a newspaper guy, radio guy and now an internet guy. A few reflections on one of your most evocative posts:
*What makes our careers the envy of our friends (I’m told that on a daily basis) isn’t our co-workers – though being a cub reporter at a joint where legends like Royko, Ann Landers and Mr. Ebert hold court is dreamy. Everyone, in their widget office or at their Thanksgiving table, interacts with wits and characters. My grandfather was “a Royko type’’ but he sold plumbing supplies so all the world didn’t know it.
No, what makes it all special is, as you note, our access to events. Elections, earthquakes, murders, Super Bowls. … all the stuff that causes “civilians’’ to “rubber-neck’’ and then to be told by the cops to “move along’’? We don’t have to move along.
*One of my coolest possessions ever: When I took a job in SF in 1988, I was presented with an ID card from the State of California. It was a MEDIA Card. It gave me permission to speed, to park where I needed to park. I felt like I was in "Dragnet''! (I'm in Texas now. Where's my Dragnet card?)
*Your “three beautiful words’’ line is beautiful in itself. I’m stealing it. ;)
*My friend, your “bloggers’’ comment – which to me reads like your keyboard expectorated the words disgustedly – might be worthy of reconsideration. Blogging, done right (and it is being done right, a million times over) has nothing necessarily to do with “sitting on one’s butt.’’ I get the old-man pain involved in the evolution of the industry (I was lucky enough to leave my newspaper in 1999 to start an online journalism venture that still thrives today and competes for Mavs and NBA. But to me, it’s like the pain guys who owned/sold/fed horses must’ve felt a century ago when cars were coming along. Horses were romantic. … and then cars became romantic. So it will be with the internet, with “blogging,’’ with today’s 16-year-old Rogers who want a voice, who want to cover a murder, who want to review a movie. And if they’re good. … they won’t do it from their butts.
We lament ‘Where will all the critics, cartoonists and investigative reporters go?’ Folks, art doesn’t die. It just changes mediums. From cave walls to wood to canvas to paper to film. From megaphone to microphone to Ipod. But it’s all still art.
Roger, if you were a 16-year-old aspiring writer today, you know what you’d be doing right now, don’t you?
You’d be “the {precocious little} editor and publisher’’ of RogerEbert/blogspot.com, is what you’d be.
* Is it more fun to be in a newsroom with 60 people than it is to be by myself, thinking and making phone calls and going to games and typing? Yes. But eventually, there will be 60 people in a “newsroom.’’ It just won’t smell of ink, is all.
Nor of cigarettes. Which, you know, romance aside, ain’t all bad.
*One time I got in trouble with my boss. So to punish me, he temporarily took me off the glorious NFL beat and “made’’ me cover a girls high school basketball game. Of course, he didn’t know what I knew: That it WASN’T punishment. Writing about an event. … about people … being curious as to what might happen and then having access to it. … THAT’s why I became a newspaperman.
I LIKED that assignment just fine. (I liked going back to the NFL the week after a little better, I admit.)
*Anybody who hasn’t been a “drunk lout’’ has never been drunk more than once. And anyone who would bother to dredge up a random 30-year-old interaction at a bar as was done above ... might be worse than a drunk lout.
He might be a sober lout. And therefore without a boozy excuse.
*More old-man syndrome: “There were real characters in those days.’’ Roger, the papers have been homogenized,at best. Truthfully, they are terminal. But the PEOPLE haven’t been homogenized! The people haven't died! There are still real characters in THESE days!
And of course, among those characters is you! ;)
fish
Ebert: Yeah, who am I to sniff at bloggers? On my blog, yet.
The most exciting sporting events I have ever witnessed were in the quarterfinals through the finals of the Sweet Sixteen Illinois high school basketball tournament. The players wanted desperately to win. Their fans were invested body and soul. If a Cinderella team from a small town survived for a few rounds, that town would be overwhelmed with frenzy.
I covered a lot of those games for The News-Gazette. Some of them were in gyms so small they only had stands along one side. I never heard such screaming.
The list that LibraryBob came up with is interesting. He lists the fears of some people that comment on how TV was suppose to spell the end of radio and the movies, or how CD's would spell the end of radio.
The thing that is interesting is that the Internet is poised to replace all of these mediums. For instance I listen to the "radio" via the Internet, for times when it's not convenient to listen to a particular show during it's normal time-slot. I watch movies and TV shows online through services such as Hulu on a regular basis. And of course it's where I get the majority of my news from.
We should point out that some technology did indeed spell the death of certain mediums. Two that stick out are VHS replaced by DVD and CD's replacing Tape Cassettes and to a large extent Vinyl Albums (though Albums are still hanging on). Newspapers seemed to have been hit hard and fast with their decline and no one seems to have a viable plan to save the medium....yet.
People don't just die one day. Fact is, we die a little bit every
day until one day when the process is finally complete. Sadly, it's the same with institutions. The newspaper industry specifically, and journalism in general, has been dying a little bit every day for a long time now, and it's frustrating to powerlessly watch this happen. And while there are plenty of zealots today who seem to relish in the demise of newspapers and assess the cause out of their own self-consumming political bias, there are also many who see that
we are losing something deeply significant. The importance of newspapers touches our lives personally, as well as our collective social and national identity. Something great and important is passing away and it seems no one can stop it. The best we can hope for is to identify what it is about newspapers that makes them special, and try to preserve these things in some sustainable form as we go forward. Change is inevitable. But change should not mean
forever losing things that are just too important to perish. If some companies are judged to be "too big to fail", some other things must
also be judged as too important to die.
Hi Roger,
I'm a reporter for a small community paper in Arizona, and I'm still the new kid on the block. Initially, I didn't really want to be a reporter. I had no idea what to do with my English Lit. degree and was kind of thrown head first into a profession I wasn't prepared for. In my 2 years working at the paper, I've come to know the ups and downs of being a journalist.
The downs: People are mean and rude, they don't call you back, they treat you like dirt, they email you about minute grammar mistakes and say "How can you call yourself a writer?" when you mispell "taut" as "taught" on a tight deadline. The work is stressful. Editors can butcher your writing. You have to be persistent, tough, and invasive. You have to develop a thick skin.
As for the ups: People are kind and thoughtful - they appreciate your work and tell you so. Sometimes what you write really does make a difference. The workday is unpredictable, sometimes downright exciting, and seeing your byline on the front page IS really awesome. Schools ask you to talk to kids on career day, and they all think you have one hell of a cool job, and they're right.
Our paper is going through some tough times right now, like all newspapers across the country. Despite my initial misgivings, I've come to the realization that I'm very lucky - lucky to be a part of this important and respected profession that may soon be gone.
-Jaime
PS: When I say, "Off the record, now...", Hildy Johnson-style, I am always secretly amused.
Ebert: It's rarely boring.
I love the way "the media" is said with contempt by people who never read a newspaper, or maybe anything else.
One good thing to do with an English degree is to read.
I believe the main reason newspapers are suffering is that they have lost most of the younger generation. Obviously, the current situation is exacerbated by the recession, and the resultant loss of advertisers, but I believe that very few young people have acquired the habit of reading a daily newspaper. This is not a new phenomenon; when I attended college 9 years ago, the local daily was available for free all across campus. Technically, it wasn't free, since our student activity funds helped to pay for them, but anyone could stroll up to the newspaper box and help himself to as many papers as desired. I took advantage of this opportunity, but almost every box was full to the brim whenever I did so. Most of the students simply didn't care.
A secondary reason for the newspapers' decline is that many people who are news junkies have gotten out of the habit of paying for their fix. Technically, I am one of these. I read several newspapers online (Wash. Post, NYTimes, etc.), but I almost never pay for a newspaper. In my case, I have ideological reasons for doing so; I don't want even a penny of my money to support people whom I consider my enemies.
The long-standing pretence of "objective journalism" is almost dead. I believe most journalists have strong political beliefs, usually liberal, and that this partisanship is the main reason why they chose their profession (see links).
http://www.nytimes.com/1992/11/18/us/increasingly-reporters-say-they-re-democrats.html
http://people-press.org/report/214/bottom-line-pressures-now-hurting-coverage-say-journalists
People such as Ron Barth, Jr. obviously disagree with me. He thinks the press was too easy on Bush (never mind Dan Rather's willingness to sacrifice his career defending forged documents in the National Guard debacle; this was exposed by bloggers). Of course, Ron Barth Jr. also believes that the Bush administration was part of the 9/11 conspiracy http://www.amazon.com/gp/cdp/member-reviews/AZQU47LRXTLZR/ref=cm_pdp_rev_all?ie=UTF8&sort_by=MostRecentReview, so it makes sense that he believes the press was not harsh enough on Bush.
Eventually, as more and more newspapers die, there will be a few remaining predators. These last survivors will probably do what warring Mafia families do when a feud has become too costly: they'll have a sit-down to hash out details for making Internet readers finally pay for content. One model might be to charge readers a certain amount for local news only, but offer a "premium" subscription that allows readers to access any of the syndicate's news websites.
In any case, I predict that the newspapers left standing will have clearly-announced biases. This hearkens back to the post-Revolutionary era of journalism, when newspapers often declared on their mastheads which party they represented. You can see this reflected to a certain degree in the cable news wars: liberals are more likely to enjoy MSNBC, Jon Stewart, and The Colbert Report, while conservatives tune into Fox.
Bill Bishop has a book called "The Big Sort: Why the Clustering of Like-Minded America is Tearing Us Apart". From the book: “We have built a country, where everyone can choose the neighbors (and church and news shows) most compatible with his or her lifestyle and beliefs. And we are living with the consequences of this segregation by way of life: pockets of like-minded citizens that have become so ideologically inbred that we don’t know, can’t understand, and can barely conceive of ‘those people’ who live just a few miles away.”
I think Bishop's basic premise is correct (although I suspect it is not true for those who are apathetic to our political process), but I don't know if it is necessarily a problem. One of the most important freedoms our Constitution provides is the freedom of association.
Ebert: I like middle-of-the-road CNN. There is something wrong with Glenn Beck and Bill O'Reilly. They're the Jerry Springers of conservatism.
Ebert: He also contributes who only sits on his ass
Milton: They also serve who only stand and wait.
-On His Blindness
Am I being an overzealous academic here or was that a veiled allusion? Not that I blame you. You can always do worse than to quote Milton. And both of you being great writers afflicted with personal challenges, maybe the reference takes on an additional level of meaning?
Ebert: I love to channel word bites.
Don’t want to sound like a sycophant but I think your writing is wonderful. I’ve been reading your stuff since the DI days. I even met you a couple of times back then. I would also, on occasional late nights after many beers at Kam’s or Stan’s, stop by the DI and watch the presses. I loved all that thundering mechanical stuff.
You mentioned Sherman Paul’s class a couple of weeks ago. One year his daughter Jared, with whom I had a nodding acquaintance, ran away. I took his class that spring and a great class it was. Later that summer I ran into her at Playland at the Beach in San Francisco.
The Mike Royko monologue was wonderful. I had an uncle who played on a pre-war Chicago team called the Lawndale Hams.
I delivered the Sun Times, the Trib, the Daily News and the Herald American when I was a kid. Haven’t been to Chicago in years other than to change planes. I need to go. It looks like the S. F. Chronicle is on its way out. I sure will miss reading the real paper paper. Keep on blogging and I hope your health is improving.
Ebert: As a kid I delivered the Champaign-Urbana Courier to the Pauls. In high school I dated Jared a little. Very, very smart. Why did she go to San Francisco and how was she doing there?
Thanks, Mr. Ebert.
I worked for The Gettysburg Times and its job printing company for about 9 years, starting out in their "cold type" room while the old Linotypes were still heating up the big composing room. The Linotypes were older than the representative sample housed in the Smithsonian at the same time.
Yes, they smoked in the newsroom. Every time I changed desks, I had to wash it down, leaving half a roll of paper towels covered in the stinking brown residue of years of smoke.
I learned to love the proportion wheel. I still think in picas and points--indeed, I work with them every day. I envy your having worked in a big-city newsroom, even though we had Mamie Eisenhower for a while (who was most newsworthy when she passed away), and a series of sitting presidents making a visit to the hallowed grounds of the battlefield. And the apple beat because Adams County is the largest apple-producing county in Pennsylvania. Fear the dreaded "tufted apple bud moth"--a real pest whose name is nonetheless fun to say out loud.
I enjoy reading your essays (I can't bring myself to call it a "blog") and wish you health and a clear mind.
Ebert: Linotype machines. Now here were contraptions. I don't think they ever wore out.
I wrote one movie review for my university's newspaper, about "Burn After Reading."
I received an e-mail from the editor an hour after sending it to him, with these words: We burnt it after reading.
Yeah, I don't think I'm ever gonna make it to the Sun-Times.
Ebert: Yeah, sure. Because you submitted it on paper, right? He sounds like a jerk.
Summary: Newspapering used to be the life. We enjoyed it a lot.
Somebody Else should have kept the woodpile high. Too bad Somebody Else didn't. Let's cry in our beer. The characters who can't write a complete paragraph won't have a built-in career, as they once did. Sob. Wah.
-30-
Ebert: I wonder how many people still know what -30- means.
Re: Marc Edward Heuck's comment above re: "The Wire".
You *should* watch the entire series, seasons one through five. Absolutely brilliant.
Mr. Ebert, did your time in the Sun-Times offices overlap with Bill Mauldin's at all? Do you have any memories of Mr. Mauldin that you'd be willing to share?
Ebert: Bill was a great guy with an infectious personality. He moved to Santa Fe and started faxing in his cartoons, and I visited him there once. He and John Fischetti of the Chicago Daily News were legendary friends.
OMG!
40 years later and there I am in a Chicago Sun-Times picture with Jim Hoge, watching man land on the moon. That's me in the miniskirt with my hand up to my mouth, right in front of Basil Talbott.
Roger, you got it all absolutely right. As I know you would.
Reading this made it seem like it all was just yesterday. I hadn't thought of Milton in years and Billy Goat's had become a SNL skit to me.
Thank you for the wonderful memories. I'm going to save this article forever.
Ebert: Marti! That is you! Those faces seem like people I just saw. You were so smart. What have you done since back in the day?
I'm glad you verified the existence of Milton. I remember somebody, maybe Larry Weinberg, calling for a copy boy one day after Milton was fired. Getting no response, he said, "Milton, thou shouldest have been alive at this hour."
Ebert: I wonder how many people still know what -30- means.
I suspect those of us who remember glue pots and pica poles...
Ebert: Everyone had their own gluing technique.
Ebert: The news business was slow to wake up. Apart from Bush's policies, why couldn't they see that Bush was just plain too stupid, uneducated and inarticulate to be President?
Hey, no snarking.
Ebert: Of course I am opinionated, but I didn't consider that snarking. It was more, like, an observation.
Roger, do you racall a fellow name of Roy Fisher? Editor of the Daily News from '65 to '71. This was my grandfather. He's on my mind from time to time, and right now I feel like writing about him, if you'll permit me.
Seems he knew everybody, like a good editor should. He and my grandmother had been guests of the Kennedys. He knew the Mercury, Gemini and Apollo astronauts, and was a friend of John Glenn's. He was pals with Royko, Terkel, and Fischetti. I'm told he once danced with Barbara Stanwyck. He was the man everyone wanted to be. At least, that's the impression I get.
I've also heard that he was one fierce warrior on the side of journalism. He was involved with the Freedom of Information Act and was the dean of the University of Missouri's journalism school, after he left the News. He was editorial director for World Book's Science Year Book for a while too. I remember he was particularly proud of that. He had a hell of a brain for science. Taught me a lot about the space program, which held a special place in his heart. I've still got his old model of the lunar lander somewhere. I really should find that.
Most of what I remember about him, though, comes from the last years of his life. The way he died is a prime example of cosmic cruelty, if such a thing exists. For a while everyone thought it was Parkinson's. Eventually the doctors figured out he'd had a series of small strokes over the years that all added up to an incapacitating dementia. For a man with an opinion on everything and a journalist's ability to express it, losing the power of speech must be something like having your hands amputated. We're all mighty fortunate that you retain your ability to type. Grandpa couldn't get his hands to stop trembling long enough to type his own name on a keyboard, towards the end. The day the old man died, I didn't shed a tear. I attribute that to the fact that I'd seen him on his deathbed in the hospice. That is no way for a human being to be.
I'm one of only three or four of his grandchildren that have significant memories of him before he stopped speaking. He had a smile like no other. It was often nothing more than a twinkling cornflower blue eye that you'd miss if you weren't looking for it. When he actually smiled, it crept up as if he were fighting it all the way. He had a sense of humor that never really let you know if he was messing with you or not. He claimed he was descended from Pocahontas, and I'm still not sure if it's true.
I remember my sister as a toddler, after Grandpa had bounced her on his knee for a few minutes. He put her down, and told her he needed to rest because he was an old man.
"You're not an old man," Elizabeth said.
Grandpa looked over at me, sitting across the room, and gave me that half-smile twinkle.
"No," he said, "I just look like an old man."
I've told my sister this story. She has no memory of it.
Ebert: You met I remember him. A striking man and a striking presence. He was editor during the last heyday of the Daily News. They still had their Foreign Service (Ray Coffey, Keyes Beech), Royko was in power, Richard Christiansen was editing Panorama, the brilliant Virginia Kay, who died way too young, was writing a new kind of three-dot column, Roy was orchestrating it all.
Good Lord, Ed Borman on Saturday nights at the News-Gazette, rewriting the news to put his own slant on a story.
I thoroughly enjoyed your look back at the S-T and Daily News of the 60's, 70's and up to date. Newspapers spoke with a collective voice of authority then. Today that authority is disseminated more widely. Not as entertaining but more democratic. The only thing missing from your retrospective was a fuller picture of the boy publisher Marshall Field, IV. The S-T/DN was a good bunch of people.
AM
Ebert: Objectivity was not Borman's strong point.
I never met Marshall Field IV. Marshall Field (no V) had inherited, and Bailey K. Howard was the place-holder.
My name is David Guzman, and I'm the arts editor for the Brooklyn College Kingsman. At the same time you posted this (the time stamp says 10:13 p.m.), the staff of the Kingsman and I were laying our 7th issue of the semester – that should give you an idea of how long we stay there every Friday. It's a lot of work, but we all enjoy it very much, even though it'd be nice of more people could appreciate what we do. (The Kingsman has a circulation of, like, 1,000.)
Anyway, even though the milieu at the Sun-Times is much more romantic than ours, everybody here is just as passionate about putting the Kingsman together. I can appreciate what you wrote about the camaraderie there – I think that having to depend on each other brought you guys closer together. We depend on each other a lot, and it feels kind of nice to be needed. Actually, we've got two new girls this year who ask me a bunch of questions, usually about something they need me to look up in “The AP Stylebook.” (I'm the only one here who ever brings the damned thing in.)
I'm also responsible for lots of other stuff, like coming up with good headlines. Sometimes, though, a great one doesn't reveal itself until it's too late. I remember giving an unfavorable review to “Across the Universe”: When Patrick, my old editor-in-chief (I sorely miss working with him), told me to come up with a headline, I went through a catalog of Beatles songs and tried to find something that worked. It took awhile, but I settled on “The Ballad of Jude and Lucy,” and felt kind of disappointed in myself for not coming up with something better, but the ideal headline came to me about three days later – “Nothing to Get Hung About.” I'll know better next time, I guess.
Ebert: Working on my college paper was life-forming for me. In those days we had our own press, linotypes, and union shop. Working with cigar-chomping shop steward Orville Moore was an education. Theory only went so far. Then type wouldn't squeeze.
Bill Nack and I loved to come up with no doubt way over-written heads. Sometimes we'd run a wire story simply as an excuse for the headline:
British Baroness Bared
By Bandits; Gong Gone
The great journalism ride lasted for 25 years after that picture was taken. And it took me from Chicago, to Detroit, to Phoenix and then to L.A., where I last saw you in the early 90s signing at Book Soup. Then, I changed fields entirely and now have "the most important job" in the world. I got my M.A. and now work at a child abuse evaluator for the Department of Children & Family Services in L.A. County. I always needed to feel I was making a difference. I believed I was doing so when that picture was taken, and know I do now.
And I still remember responding to the cry "boy," even though I was most undoubtedly a "girl."
Ebert: Most undoubtedly.
Thank you for warming my heart and the hearts of legions of other young and not so young newspaper reporters. The funny thing is that, secretly, we all knew this was coming but decided to go into the business anyway. Explain that one... Wait...I think you already did.
Ebert: Never in my wildest dreams did I think this day would come, but it was coming for a long time. The death of the New York Herald-Tribune was an early omen. Then we started to lose four-paper towns (Chicago) and three-paper towns...and two-paper towns...and...
Funny how your entry here made me nostalgic for a time I missed out on. I was never a journalist, though I did a lot of op-ed and column writing for my various college papers. When I finally got to work for a real newspaper in 2002, it was as a copy editor. No smoking in the newsrooms, no drinking on the job and a hell of a lot more computerized than is probably healthy...but the thrill of being in the know before anyone in the daylight world, the adrenaline of working on deadline, the beers after the paper was put to bed; it was indeed the best damn job I ever had. Worth the late nights, the missed holidays, even the continual fights with creeping corporate groupthink. It's been four years since I left the biz, and I think about going back more often than good sense would dictate, even in this craptastic environment. Thanks, Roger, for reminding me of the rush and the reasons for it.
Ebert: Corporate groupthink. That led us into the spiral of whoring after the "younger demographics" who weren't reading the paper in the first place. A lot of younger readers were, or would have been, if it hadn't been dumbed down for them. It never occurred to the marketing morons that the "younger demographics" they should be aiming for were the best and the brightest. They turn up here constantly.
I notice (and admire) a technique here to stave off jealousy in readers by marking the era as one past and elegiac. It reminds me of Turgenyev's "Spring Torrents", looking back at youthful glory from middle age.
Ebert: What I envy is that your youthful glory is happening now. Still, non je ne regrette rein.
To add on Stanley Dancer's assessment,
I am a little disheartened with all sides in a time such as this. The news shows or media every now and then lets it slip out that bad times = good times for us. Take a look at comedians for example: As George W. Bush's presidency was ending, you hear all of them saying, "well, I can't exactly make fun of Obama: what am I going to do?", to which they've now capitalized on the economic turmoil. It's okay, I suppose for comedians to do this, but I fear this may be a part of the media's mindset, to their own detriment, of course, such as the losing of major newspapers.
It's been schizophrenic with the economic turmoil to me. One day its "What is going on in the world economy?", and the next day: "it's the bankers fault for the whole world's demise....seemingly." Back and fourth til they've finally arbitrarily decided "yes, bankers, indeed.", but they still every now and then let it slip out that they are not sure, but are going to faint surety so as to not look amateurish and say "Did I say I wasn't sure the other day, because I meant I was 99.9% sure." while in fine print at the bottom of the screen(caution: that 1% margin of error may contain the actual whole truth).
What happened to the energy crisis? We paid an average of 120$ per barrel of oil last year (900 billion,total bill), which averaged 11$ per barrel in 1999 (80 billion, total). And what about how the oil embargo, (which was for political reasons), of 1973? Since then we've had a red flag raised that has never been solved vis a vis energy. What about the oil embargo of 1979? and how recessions followed after each embargo?
It is in fact the energy crisis that caused this recession and will cause another one as soon as we emerge out of this one. And it isn't only a matter of how much gas costs (it also hurts everything that gets transportation or uses transportation: the service industry, auto industry etc), it is who is getting the money. OPEC is and they are responsible for the price hikes, and Saudi Arabia head of OPEC is the number one financier of terrorism worldwide. They are also in position to buy us out on the cheap right now and have such intentions of doing so. Imagine if Bin Laden was head of the banks, and other major corporations? It really is not forced logic; I'm not saying he himself, of course, but people with his kind of mindset. Our nation is under a disastrous threat.
We need to pass a law mandating cars sold in America be flex-fuel vehicles, such as the Open Fuel Standard Act. Obama has a superb policy that mandates all new cars sold be flex-fuel by 2012, and it's importance is too large to not be stressed enough.
Our 900 billion dollar oil price hike brought up the price of transportation which inherently hurts everything involved in it, which caused people to leave their mortgages, which hurt major financial institutions, which hurt credits and loans, which crashes stores and major newspapers and results in job losses.
We need to solve these things in the order of the their fall and go beyond, as we should. Alcohol cars solves the oil problem, tax deductible down payments on houses will solve the housing crisis (IRS will lose 45 billion a year; it's better than losing a trillion in the treasury, but too late), when the mortgage crisis is solved the financial institution's will be too to a very substantial extent, thus money in people's hands, and that cycle is broken, which is doomed to repeat.
Then we should have humans to Mars exploration. The moon-landing created a growth in the technological field to which we owe computers, and things like the internet. That's how we go beyond, literally.
I've never worked for a Newspaper, let alone a big one like the Chicago Sun Times. But I can relate to your memories of how things "used" to be Roger, as I got my start in classical Animation and man, those were the days. Especially if you weren't a man!
Picture a fledgling Ink & Paint Animation studio inside a converted brick warehouse down near the tracks by the water's edge in the dodgy part of town; East Vancouver, in the middle of all that was seedy, dangerous and exotic - if you'd been educated by Nuns. Beneath the cover of darkness unseemly transactions took place, and why it wasn't uncommon to step over condoms while walking to work the next day; so too, a few drunks sleeping it off. But that was part of the charm! It was gritty, real and non-homogenized. It was harsh but it honest, like the Bowery in NY, once upon a time.
Back in the day, Animation was especially transient; we were hired guns. I started with cel painting on Spielberg's Tiny Toon Adventures; one of countless runaway production I'd work on. It was the pilot; non union piece-work and no paid overtime. $1.00 a cel. However in exchange you got to breathe. The studio wasn't run by a suit. Show up wearing whatever, grab a coffee, light a smoke and get to work. Our desks were light tables with drying shelves above them, you worked elbow to elbow with coworkers in an open-plan space. Music blared as paint flew and tempers too, and vulgar jokes were tossed around and knocked back with bottles of beer. I once set-up a shooter bar on my desk; good times. But we meet our deadlines! Too often working late and for free to make sure deadlines were met; that's how things "got done" back in the day or you wouldn't be asked back. A cold reality but there you go. There is nothing glamorous about Production work. Then or now.
I was given a chance to try hand-inking cels, and found joy! I loved everything about it, even the smell of the ink. And I was really good at it too; it also paid more. Renhoek & Stimpy aside, I worked mostly on commercials until the work dried up and I moved on; parting company with some I'd never see again, to work on other projects with friends I'd keep for life.
The best times were at Marv Newland's International Rocketship. Some friends from the other studio were there too, so I settled in quickly. That was their first location, downtown Vancouver, which introduced me to yet more sights & sounds and the various hazards that went with them; mostly prostitution but occasionally you'd encounter some ranting lunatic as you prayed for your bus to arrive. It would take pages to recount it all, so let's just sum up that period by saying - I once worked on an animated "adult" short and there was cartoon sex involved. Bring the kids! :)
Once at the new location, outside the core now and in a larger studio with just as much freedom to breathe, I found the best of all worlds; getting paid to do what I loved (inking) and not having to wear a straight jacket while I did it. A place where, despite boys being boys, it was home and I loved it. You have no idea unless you've inked what a Zen-like experience it can be to load your brush and "feel" the energy in the animator's drawing as you breathe life into your line. Sigh! Best of all, you could take real pride in your work; for it was hand-made Animation.
Like the old Disney and Chuck Jones Warner Bro's cartoons, an artist touched every single piece, and you poured your sweat and tears into it for knowing your were making Art. You dragged yourself to the studio each day and worked like a dog until dark. You got paid a fraction of what the Yanks did and knew it, but you also weren't working for a Bank and didn't have to show-up at 9:00 am on the dot and punch a clock. As long as you inked a certain amount for the next morning's paint, you could ink on your own clock unless there was a crunch. For Rocketship was independent studio, it wasn't financed or affiliated with Hollywood. And the flexibility Marv allowed us as artists, enabled us work not as machines now but as human beings. For it's a creative endeavor at the end of the day and corporate forgets that and partly why too much of what comes out of Hollywood now, sucks.
Whenever anyone asked me what I did for a living, their eyes would light up when they heard "animation". But only for thinking it was like being in the movies. The closest I ever got to "celebrity perks" was when Gary Larson paid for a fancy spread inside the equally as fancy Pan Pacific Hotel - where we watched the broadcast premier of "Tales From the Far Side I" on CBS. He didn't understand animators and ergo why he agreed to an open bar. Live and learn, dude. :)
The money earned on things like "Tales From the Farside I and II" funded excursions, some overseas, where further adventures were had; like Venice! It was also the last time I'd work for Marv, I man I admire more than he knows and for what he continues to stand for. When I got back from Europe, the landscape had changed. Storm clouds had been brewing for a while but I'd hoped they would pass. They didn't. The studio couldn't compete with newer technology and eventually closed. The arrival of computers put many out of work. I'd spend the next several years freelancing on privately commissioned pieces, but it was never the same. I missed the energy. Eventually, I'd get back into it via Photoshop and ironically for the same guy I'd first worked for; he'd come up in the world. And it was in sharp contrast to what I'd known before.
A big budget Fox series at a bigger studio now - and suits were everywhere, bean counters too. Along with cubicals. Worse, there were sadly only a handful of actual Artists working on it, as most were just kids who'd never gotten their hands dirty. I managed to bond with a few of the old guard, authentic counter-culture types; and we daily mourned the death of Animation as we'd known it, while sighing into our Kilkenny's at the Irish Heather pub. For knowing we'd witnessed the end of an era.
P.S. I've seen Monsters vs. Aliens (courtesy of the Russians) and ergo, not in 3D. However I saw "Coraline" in 3D and that was enough. As for this effort, while I miss what I've recounted above, I loved Wall-E and it's not Classical Animation. But it had the same heart as the older stuff and that's what counts, you know? And why I didn't care for Monsters vs. Aliens. No real heart. I thought the humour was lame and lacking wit and that the pop-cultural references fell flat. I didn't like Ginormica for feeling she was a banal version of girl power. And I've since read your review and yes, frenetic action for want of a better plot.
Remember "The Iron Giant" - when he says "Superman"? Or the hard life lesson learned by Bambi, or when Dumbo gets separated from his Mum?! Remember the little rat who wanted to cook? And when Lady and The Tramp eat spaghetti? Or the brilliantly scary "Monster House"? And absolutely, Pinocchio.
That's what Monsters vs Aliens "isn't" - not even close.
Ebert: And the 3-D was simply another turn of the screw.
I worked as a copy editor at a paper for four years. It was almost disappointing to finally see a newsroom after seeing Citizen Kane, The Front Page, The Hudsucker Proxy et al - no typewriters, no hard-drinking reporters wearing hats with a card in the band saying "PRESS", no one screaming "STOP THE PRESSES!", no one going out for a martini-based lunch, no one yelling how they were going to "bust this story wide open!", no one slapping the adorable secretary "dame" on the butt and then cheating on his wife with her...
Well, I suppose SOME things have changed for the better. Still, I feel like I missed some magic by being born in 1980. Newsrooms seem disappointingly muted these days.
http://www.guardian.co.uk/film/2009/apr/05/state-of-play-kevin-macdonald
I've just read the above article in The Guardian, in which director Kevin McDonald says the following about his new thriller, State of Play:
"I thought the crisis in newspapers was something to be explored; I love All the President's Men and, in fact, all films about journalism. I thought we could make the last film about newspapers before they die."
Sounds like it could be pretty interesting. I look forward to reading your review.
It's fun to go back in the time machine and see how things were back in the good old days. Here's a fascinating Ebert commentary from 1969.
http://monstermemories.blogspot.com/2008/11/1969-readers-digest-night-of-living.html
I think I just stumbled on the only intelligent place in the Interwebs. Normally, I think reader comments are the most depressing things in the world. ("I hate emmigrunts," "You stupid libs," etc.) But here Roger's lovely words are actually followed by more lovely words.
It's like Flowers for Algernon, only it's the entire world and not just one retarded guy who has gone suddenly smart.
I'm not sure I'll ever leave.
PS: I got three beautiful years of newspapering in before I left for magazines. It wasn't just the ink that rubbed off on me.
Wonderful, Roger!
I remember all those you mention - and lots of the hijinks.
Today's newsrooms are way too sterile for my taste.
Although I do engage in self-publishing, I often wonder if it really means anything in the big picture. I get this feeling that I'm writing as an exercise in futility because, as an educator, I write to offer my insights into a world where a thousand other educators are also writing to be heard. It's more like a competition, and although many times it can feel like a shared experience, it often leaves me feeling frustrated. When you write a blog post, you have to then go online and "sell" your post or idea to other like-minded bloggers.
I sat next to a man at a coffee shop yesterday, and saw that he was studying for something. Me, being the lifelong learner, asked him what he was studying for. Well, an hour later, and without getting one world in edgewise, he told me his opinions about politics, religion, the environment, congressional legislation, fibre-optic networking (yawn), and, I think something about the test he was studying for.
It made me feel sorry for him. It also made me think about this Facebooking, Blogging, Twittering world that we're coming to live in. So many of us have been given a pulpit from which to stand on with these communicative tools, that we're shouting from the rooftops to be heard, all at the same time. Unfortunately, since we're all trying to be heard, not many of us are actually listening to each other. I think that the act of writing and communicating is a good thing to do, and I never dreamed I would be doing that every day, as I am.
But the human connection is lost in this self-publishing world. Back in the old newspaper days- they wrote for the people, to get the world out. Today, unfortunately, I think many of us write to hear ourselves speak.
Daniel Rezac
So what I'm hearing is that the glory days, present downfall, and possible future revival of the American newspaper are all directly or indirectly linked to the right to place a cold, dewy beer on your desk and not have any questions asked?
It all sounds so simple put like that, but there seems to be something missing. Something to do with heart, or courage, or some kind of fearlessness in the face of a heartless and modernizing society. But beer. To think it was the absence of spirits that has been keeping the spirits of the newsmen down this whole time.
Ebert: I'll write about the beer another time.
Hi Ebert - Thanks for telling these stories. Just wanted to echo another writer (above) and say I'd love to read more like this in book form. Take care.
Two years in the paste-up room, where we didn't use paste but wax to stick the damn paper together. I smoked like a chimney and sang at tremendous volume to hear myself over the typesetter.
To this day I can't walk through an airport without being back there. Something about the unburned diesel exhaust conjures up the smell of that waxer. Makes me want to smoke, too, and that's about the only time I tap my breast pocket to see if I've got smokes left. None, of course, not for more than a decade. A pity.
You know, Roger, part of what's wrong with today's journalists is that they went to college. J-school has had a horrible flattening effect on US media. Many of the guys you worked with were prized not for what they learned in school but for their unrelenting reading in their own lives. I am sick to death of hearing that spelling is not indicative of a person's intelligence, that reading is not correlative to a person's true worth. If you didn't spell well in the old media, you were at best careless and probably not trustworthy; and if you didn't read, you were a blockhead unqualified to conduct a proper interview.
I still think that's the case.
Thank you so much for your article. Someone earlier mentioned that your stories reminded him of his grandfather, who was a newspaperman. Ours was a newspaper familiy as well. My grandfather was a guy named Angelo Biondo and he was at the Daily News for over 40 years as a sportswriter, back when the paper actually needed a regular bowling column. His best friend/my uncle was Ted Damata, who ran the sportsroom at the Trib. It was sure a different era -Halas would come by frequently begging people to take free Bears tickets.
Is it true that back in the day if you worked for the papers you could pretty much stay drunk for free through most of December thanks to all the huge corporate Christmas parties?
Hi Roger,
Great piece. I remember or knew every name you mentioned. I have followed your career since 1966 when you came to the ST with big hoopla. This was just after my father, ST city editor Karin Walsh died in 1965). I've been following you and the Sun-Times ever since. Just retired from Pioneer Press as a managing editor after almost 20 years but I am still a newsie. Love those pictures. I have some black and whites that were shots of stills of the newsroom from the movie Calling Northside 777 where Lee J. Cobb played my dad.
Or dad told us he was in the movie but we never saw him until a few years ago when I watched 777 on the computer --and there he was in one of the middle scenes - in the window!
Ahh, the good old days of the 40s, 50s and 60's!! Keep writing!
Anyone who has found their vocation can relate to this article. Especially the beginning when you realized you were becoming part of a club or fraternity. Looking up to the older people around you, admiring what they are. I remember an old boss of mine. No one ever worked harder than this guy. Usually you think of a boss as someone sitting in the corner office taking naps between counting the money you've made him. Not so with ol' Jim. He would come in an hour before anyone else, get the coffee going, sit down at his desk and light up his cigarette (and another, and another). He would lean over his work and produce an endless stream of drawings. All done by hand, in his trademark style of drafting. He had this antique intercom system with one squawk box in his office and another outside in the general area where most of the desks were. --squawk--KARL!, Did you finish the roof?! I'm sitting around like the Maytag man over here!--squawk And so it would go all week long until about three in the afternoon on Friday when you would hear --squawk--BRUCE!, Bring me a jug of water. Come on' down boys. And we would all get up from our desks, clean mugs in hand and file into the boss's office. He'd finally push himself back from his desk and stop his work, the jug arrives and he pours himself a whiskey n' water, and frown at anyone who had the bad judgment to pick a different drink. We'd arrange ourselves around in our usually places and laugh about the week. Good times, good times.
I like the way you describe the buzz of the newsroom. That atmosphere is my favourite part of "All The Presidents' Men". I loved the way the editors gathered around their table, working out the next days paper. The way the journalists waited poised on the edge of there chairs, just bursting to defend their work as the Big Dog edited their article with his red pen. You could just feel the authority of his position. I've never been in a newsroom, but that movie seems to paint a very true picture.
Random thoughts -
Yes, blogging will fill in some of the spaces left when the newspapers die. But they won't fill in all - local news will suffer, as will investigations (both local and national). I'm not talking the latest sex scandal - I'm talking the important stuff. Some things simply take more resources and knowledge than one, two or even three bloggers are likely to have. In addition, nearly all good reporting is based first on a network of connections, from janitors and secretaries to the real power brokers. How many bloggers are going to have that?
What bloggers do seem to have are folks phoning/emailing in tips, anonymously or otherwise. (Sometimes) good to start with, but almost never good to go. Tipsters often/usually have their own agendas, which don't have anything to do with reliable news. Much footwork and digging is needed after a tip is received, often with the help of those connections I mentioned above. Which is why there is soooooo much crap in blogs...
Bloggers are occasionally good at the "gotcha" stuff - rarely at anything deeper. Of course, good investigative journalism is a rapidly dying art everywhere. Newspapers have been running after the lowest common denominator for a long while now.
Someone mentioned the move from horse power to car power. Ironically, there is fallout from that change so far removed from the obvious as to seem science fiction. Kids have many ear infections and allergies these days, far more than in the past. One cause may be that kids aren't exposed to livestock anymore. Kids raised on farms have far, far fewer of these ailments than their city counterparts. Ya just never know... ;-)
Isn't it interesting that when other industries are marginalized or considered irrelevant (say logging or, in the case of Great Britain, coal mining) that it creates national attention and endless public expressions of outrage (not to mention not a few snarky bumper stickers), but when something as vitally important to freedom of information as the news industry is virtually gutted for the sake of corporate greed, nary a word is said in it's passing.
Boy, reading this reminded me of a video you recently posted where Gene Siskel is imploring his children to be in love with what they do in life. I'm not quite there yet, but you've inspired me to double up my efforts. Much thanks.
Not to rip on your reminiscence, but a different perspective...
Im thinking in terms of the excess - as in, how may forests are turned into print each day. I dont know how the paper is arrived at, if it is mainly recycled (now, not the generations-worth prior), what it consists of. BUt, from this laymans view, I dont see how it could be reasonable to expect that such extreme consumption could continue indefinitely.
But then this is not to say that the internet is a solution. Apparently, Google`s search engine enlists approximately 1000000 servers. The amount of electicity required to perform 1 search using google is enough to boil 2 kettles of water. Many of Google`s server stations are located in Eastern Europe where coal is the dominant turbine fuel. IN the US, major rivers are being diverted to empower Google. Thats pretty cool when you read the contents of a top ten search list and when you consider that the major shortage facing the current century will be fresh water. And thats just for one search engine. ANd how many people will become more frugal with search engine use in light of this fact...? And thats how far we`ve come.
Well Roger it's nice to know that some people waste up to three decades over a bar rant, keep that resentment it really helps!!
Anyway I agree with a lot of the comments on the fact it's time for YOU to write a screenplay about the newspaper days you have all the history and the facts and so many great stories what better way for you to leave us something that will soon be lost. Not to mention ALL the celebrities you have interviewed to boot!
Sadly the fact that the newspapers gave themselves away by allowing their paper to be free online so why pay for it?? And well there is no better way to put it, it's like pissing in a pool once it's done it's done period. Btw I CLEARLY RECALL you taking the press to task during the W admin for not doing ANY investigation at all for fear of looking "unpatriotic". Sigh. Too late the damage is done but a good film awaits to be authored by you.
LOL..Ebert and Roeper basically wrote the same column today
It appears what I meant to say was that 2 google searches = 1 boiled kettle.
(and yes I googled to find out which)
Thanks for such a sweet stroll down media lane!
I remember a day back in the 70s when I was a senior in high school and I was sitting in my folk's car in front of Acorn on Oak waiting for a break in the traffic so I could pull out. Suddenly a car backed into me as it tried to squeeze into a too-small parking space. A grizzled-looking guy got out of his car, wobbled over and said with a slight slur, "Heya kid, I'm real sorry about that....come on in and I'll give you my name and number for your insurance guys." Inside the Acorn on Oak, he pulled out a longish sheet of paper and did his best to writer his name and number, signed it and wished me well...after first offering to buy me a drink. When I got back in my car, I looked at the paper and read "Mike Royko."
A small, meaningless story, but an incident I have never forgotten if only because I mourn the loss of columnists like Mike Royko.
An era is over.
I am only 22 and I know that I cannot begin to understand what it was like to work for a newspaper in the good old days. However, I currently work on my college newspaper and I believe that reporters hold the most important job in the world. They alone hold in their hands the power. They alone are the ones that the government fears.
I have even felt the rush of injustice as a reporter. There was a time when a member of our staff was denied a public record from the police station. When he tried to explain the Freedom of Information Act the police officer yelled at him and threatened to arrest him. He was willing to get arrested this was about more than the information he requested this was about our right as reporters. (They issued us an apology the next day after their superior had explained that they were, in fact, in the wrong.)
As the features editor of my very small school paper I have the great pleasure of writing movie reviews. I have been reading your reviews for as long as I can remember and you inspire me. Your reviews are more than just reviews they are their own form of art. I know I have a lot to learn when it comes to films but they are my passion and I aspire to one day be as talented as you.
I hope that they day never comes when newspapers officially die. They are too important and only when they are lost will people truly realize this.
Your reminiscence was a prose analog to Barbra Streisand singing "The Way We Were." I hope it isn't a eulogy just yet.
As a parenthetical aside, I met you once back in the early 1970s when you were holding court at a bar that was/was nearby the BillY Goat. I was introduced to you by then up-and-coming Sun-Times reporter Nancy Day, who now heads the journalism department at Columbia College in Chicago.
My brother Rodney has had the privilege of working with you to edit your last couple of books published by the University of Chicago Press. So I feel a bit more closely connected to you than the usual anonymous blogger.
I am now a "retired" journalist, having accepted a buyout from the S.F. Chronicle three years ago. When I think about those days you chronicled so well in your journal entry, I have a bittersweet sensation in my mind for the future of our "old-fashioned" journalism and its murky future.
Ebert: Your brother is a sweet guy and a great editor. And Nancy Day herself just posted a comment, which I'm, sitting on because it's too late for me to write a proper response. This thread is a small world.
Roger, this again was a fabulous piece of English and shows why you won the Pulitzer: great reporting.
This essay reminded me of your book "Two Weeks In Midday Sun": I've went to Cannes (for a radio station) in the early 80s, and you perfectly captured the spirit of that zoo/circus/movie-heaven.......what a great writer you are!
Roger-
I understand exactly what you mean when you talk about the excitement of the by-line. I covered the sports desk for my college newspaper last semester, and the first time I saw my name beneath a headline, I was overcome with joy. I called every friend I have to share it with them, even though they couldn't see the paper.
This semester, I was promoted to editor of the Arts and Features section, and I have had no time to do any reporting. Being an editor is nice enough, but I miss the thrill of seeing my name in print. Somehow, it's not the same to call home to my dad and tell him, "Look at the stories I assigned to other people."
I got into journalism because I love the writing. You and Nora Ephron are my biggest inspiration, not for your success, but for the quality of your writing. Day in and day out, no one produces better work than you and Ms. Ephron.
But, I look forward to being out of college and returning to the writing, in whatever form it may be.
Thanks Roger.
- Anthony
Are your stories ever coming out in book form? I could read this stuff ALL day.
Thanks.
Dina
At 11:30 a.m. I was sitting here without my Sunday Sun-Times due to a failed delivery for the sixth time over the past year. It pisses me off when I don't get my paper! Worse yet is when it is unreadable because it is wet! 35 years ago I remember reading the Sun-Times on the way to work, and the Daily News on the way home. The Tribune was only worth picking up on Sunday for the job wanted ads until the Alien forced Mr. Royko to cross the street to labor for the Tribune. Reading Mr. Ebert's blog reminded me why I have been a loyal newspaper reader for all of my adult life - accurate information, good writing, insightful opinions, sometimes in an entertaining fashion. Even when the media is biased, which it most certainly is at times, it serves a useful purpose for a community. Newspapers inform and promote debate which I think is essential to a free society. I can live with an on-line version, although I would prefer paper, but I do not want to sacrifice quality content that our great newspapers have delivered over the years. We should remember that it is the human input that makes a great newspaper, not the paper and ink on which it has traditionally been displayed.
Excellent piece Roger. It makes me wish you would write an autobiography. Do you think that situation was unique to the Sun-Times, or does that account reflect all journalism at the time? Will the oncoming generation of journalists ever work like that again, as a community, or will we be getting our news from the first guy that can get to his computer, alone in his bedroom?
Well, as I noted, I wasn’t Jared’s best pal. I just had a nodding acquaintance with her. She was at Playland with a boy friend and I was there with a girl friend. It was a “Hi, how are you? Nice weather” sort of meeting. I wasn’t a confidant. She certainly seemed happy enough but all kinds of people were showing up in SF in those days so there didn’t seem anything odd or troubling about the meeting. I never saw her again.
OK, Rog, is it Pull-itzer, or Pue-litzer?
I vote Pull, and here's why.
Competing with all of the guys,
through the newspaper ranks she would rise.
When _ _ _ _ _ induced her to tug on his rooster,
she got the Pulitzer Prize.
Roger,
It wasn't just that papers tried to woo the 18-25 demographic, but that the mighty reporters of yesteryear weren't really replaced. I know Royko was unique and irreplaceable, but he left a void that no one came close to filling. Same with Kup, Bob Greene, Ray Coffey etc. Where are the big names in journalism today? This may reveal my ignorance, but I can only think of Clarence Page off the top of my head (excluding you, of course).
I grew up with the Chicago Daily News and cried (at 16) when it folded. I still have a copy of the last paper somewhere. I miss the whole meme of reading the paper, but must confess to not subscribing to one because they pile up and end up in the recycle bin--I'm essentially paying to recycle newspaper. Of course, papers are dying from many causes, but I don't think we will realize our loss until they are truly gone. I hope that doesn't happen, but right now that looks like a fool's hope.
When I arrived at the Sun-Times just before the 1972 election, I was assigned to sit next to “Parson Larson,” the religion writer. I answered the phone in a standard professional way and a man with a deep voice demanded to know, “Where’s Art?” One day, Art Petaque had at least five stories going in the newsroom, and his rewrite team reached all the way back to me. The Sun-Times was my first big city newspaper job. Of couse there was smoking and drinking in the newsroom and for hours after we met deadline. I had worked for the Rock Island Argus during college summers, where Miss Potter put rules of comportment in the ladies restroom, including no sleeveless frocks and no ankle socks. I worked at the Daily Illini with Dan Balz and Roger Simon, then for the (long defunct) Courier, which asked me to stay on. I needed the money, but I could not work for a competing daily paper, so I switched to the photo staff on the DI (full disclosure and contributing factor: I was “going out” with the photo editor.) After grad school, I worked for the Palo Alto Times, where the men were allowed to smoke at their desks, but not the women. I never liked smoking, but the unjust sexism was quite another thing. I next landed in Springfield, where, then as now, there were (at least) as many characters in the political world as in the newsroom. Gene Callahan, after accepting a job as press secretary to Cecil Partee, did me the huge favor of recommending me for his political column in what was then know as the Illinois State Register. I was the first woman and youngest person to hold that job, and caught the attention of Jim “The Golden Jet” Hoge. He recruited four of us to start on the same day in October 1972: Simon, Scott Jacobs, G. Robert “Bob” Hillman and me. I’d been writing about Nixon, McGovern, protesters, a great mix…and found myself in my first days working for a metro still Downstate, driving around crazy people (in one case, literally; I had to put her on the next bus back to the city) to get a prescribed number of respondents in each town to complete the Straw Poll.
It was hard, at first, to scream“COPY” from your seat; I did not yell “boy,” because young women got to do that job, too. I also worked at AP in San Francisco and AP and for the (old) San Francisco Examiner. As the world’s oldest intern, I also reported during the summer of 1996 for the Anchorage Daily News on a program sponsored by ASNE. I found people less willing to talk to reporters than when I’d been reporting every day, and much more suspicious. I left daily journalism when it was still lots of fun. I’d arranged a job-sharing arrangement (unprecedented then, 1981) with Nancy Dooley at the Ex; a lot of people thought we were the same person, anyway, unless they’d met us, and we were veterans who could fill just about any reporting or desk slot. Both of us wanted to spend time with babies and keep the jobs we loved. Alas, my (then) husband, an academic, wanted to move back to Boston where he earned his doctorate. Since I’d already had my “mid-career” fellowship, it was his turn and we moved East, where I started teaching at Boston University and writing (and over-reporting) magazine articles. Now I’m chair of the journalism department of Columbia College Chicago, where we honor John Fischetti and editorial cartoonists every year:
www.colum.edu/fischetti
Sometimes people ask me if it’s ethical to teach journalism when the news from our profession is bad. It’s bad for newspapers, in general. But not necessarily bad for journalism. Witness this blog -- so much thoughtful interaction, so many stories. Much better than the rants we used to get when people just called in to complain about our stories. Even though a lot of us posting are not in that bustling newsroom (I remember the fire boat spouts outside the Sun-Times windows, and dashing across the bridge with piles of documents, trying to keep them from blowing away,, and of course, no cell phones to update the desk…such as when we filed a complete story on deadline, WOMAN KILLED IN GRANT PARK, in the summer of ’73. I wrote it graf by graf, yelling COPY as I ripped each page from my typewriter.) Back to now: Most of our motivated graduates are hired, two by CNN last May, one by the Trib to do “social media,” one by a station in Fort Smith, Arkansas, where he’s been called on to report live on everything from ice storms to the legislature.
Even with slashed newsrooms (thank you, Sir Black, you #%&*#!) the Sun-Times continues to publish excellent work, not only by columnists, but by its beat and investigative reporters. Check out this year’s nominees for Lisagor awards (including two Columbia College journalism students and lots of Sun-Times journalists):
http://www.headlineclub.org/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=194:finalists-for-the-2008-lisagor-awards&catid=2:rotator&Itemid=58
Many young people are excited about journalism and doing it well. (You’re right Roger, the “suits” condescendingly dumbed-down print editions, thinking that was how to reach the coveted younger demographic.) Last year, two Columbia COLLEGE students won the national student Investigative Reporters and Editors award for exploring nepotism (!) in Chicago government hiring. This year, the award went to University of Georgia students who exposed long-time sexual harassment by professors, which had been allowed to continue without sanction. The students were threatened with lawsuits, but persevered. Many other examples of recent terrific investigative journalism are here:
http://www.ire.org/irenews/2008-ire-award-winners-announced/
Among them is the team of young reporters, performing the important role of journalists as watchdogs of government, for their online-only publication in San Diego.
To go out on a clichéd literary note, it is the best AND worst of times, but there is much exciting work being done...
Ebert: Roger Simon and Dan Balz. Now top political reporters! The Courier. used to carry a route. The great Bob Sink was a family friend. When it went out of business, that was the first time a newspaper broke my heart.
Scott Jacobs. He did that video about Royko. "G. Bob." Simon. You. A great day. Hoge also hired me.
Columbia College. Taught there twice. A true Chicago-style college.
It's still worth becoming a journalist. Maybe it's only the Front Page era that';s dying. Hollow laugh.
Thanks, Roger. You brought back a lot of memories for me and Marvin. Wish this didn't read so much like an obituary. Eppie, Paul Galloway, Royko, Art Petacque (yes, it's Petacque--I'll always be a copy editor no matter what)--they were all great characters. I also seem to remember that the features department always got a bit livelier whenever you walked in to entertain us with your witty monologues.
I'm an Internet junkie through and through, but I'll miss newspapers. There's something about getting that newsprint on your hands that keeps you grounded in reality.
Good luck to you and all your colleagues.
Reply to: Marie:I Wall-E had the same heart as the older stuff and that's what counts, you know? And why I didn't care for Monsters vs. Aliens. No real heart...frenetic action for want of a better plot. Remember "Lady and The Tramp" eating spaghetti? That's what Monsters vs Aliens "isn't" - not even close.
Reply to: Andi: As a kid I always wanted to be a reporter. I wanted to be Jane Russell, and later Holly Hunter in Broadcast News.
At the intersection of "great movies" and "my life as a newspaper reporter"... there's an empty spot on the bench. Waiting.
With a heroine as strong and lovable as Maria from "The Sound of Music"... not necessarily a reporter, as long as she falls in love. Falls hard enough to leave bruises and spaghetti sauce stains.
If you're going to remake "Lady and the Tramp," the newspaper guy is The Tramp. Right? Or do I have it backwards?
Somehow James Cameron found the magic formula with "Titanic." Based on a real story, so the conflict was always the 300-pound gorilla in the room. When you saw wealthy Americans eating dinner, you thought, "I wonder how many of them are going to die?"
The problem isn't finding the drama in the current newspaper situation. It's finding the humor. And that's what I read in Roger's column, so much wonderful stuff in the story of a young man growing up in the newsroom of a Chicago paper.
Andrew Lloyd Webber flirted with the possibility of a musical based on the life of Conrad Black. Webber's greatest success was "Phantom of the Opera." He had just married a young singer named Sarah Brightman, and he found a story that gave her the opportunity to show off her talent.
Before "The Sound of Music" opened in London, Webber had a TV show similar to "American Idol" where the public voted on the singer they wanted to be the new Maria.... and now she's been replaced by a singer named Summer Strallen.
If you still can't picture it, try this:
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/tvshowbiz/article-511593/Andrew-Lloyd-Webber-finally-reveals-new-Maria--Summer-Hollyoaks.html
Webber made an agreement with the popular British series "Hollyoaks" to give her a role for five months, building up a following from young television viewers. "The producers of Hollyoaks approached me and suggested doing something interesting," he says. "I immediately thought, we're recasting Maria - I wonder if we could blur fact and fiction?" Webber made two cameo appearances. The pivotal scene was shot on location at London's Palladium theatre, where The Sound Of Music is in residence. The plot follows desperate young singer Summer Straw (played by Strallen) stalking Lloyd Webber, tricking her way into his office and launching into Any Dream Will Do.
http://www.thesoundofmusictour.com/cast/summerstrallen.php
Such a wonderful example of blurring the lines between fact and fiction. If newspapers are drivn out of business by CNN and an Internet where you can research the background... where's the story that will make fans come back to see the movie again and again? A hero as rugged as Bogart in "Casablanca"... a heroine as noble as Maria... and at the end, the hero's best friend cautions him, "Let it go, Jake. That's why they call it Chicago."
Just laid off so Fred Smith can lie at the next FedEx shareholders meeting and claim fiscal responsibility regarding the capitalist collapse. My severance pay will be taxed so the money can end up in the pocket of some bailed-out banker.
Reading Roger's latest entry - it's become the Sunday habit to replace newspaper funnies - I couldn't help thinking of the fate of newspapers comparatively. Of course all of the "traditional" industries are disappearing in the same ways for the same reasons, but it's obvious that so much more is at stake.
Can you imagine a lifestyle such as the one described developing today among a group of, oh, say, telecommunications specialists? Insurance estimators? Job-search seminarians?
Is it really just nostalgia? By-gone eras and all that.
Am I just wide-eyed for days gone bye? Or teary-eyed for days to come?
Yes, Roger, does love his literary allusions, veiled or no. Part of his charm, don'tcha think?
Thank you for those wonderful memories. I worked my way through graduate school at NIU based, in part, on my scribblings for the Arlington Heights Daily Herald. Good writing will always find an outlet and an audience. Good writing is equal parts truth, passion, and perspective. You possess all of those qualities in abundance. Keep on writing, regardless.
Great job reminiscing. As someone who wrote for the DI, strings sports stuff for the Gazette, and will edit this summer at the sports desk for the St. Paul Pioneer Press ... newspapers must survive!
Roger, should there be worries about entering the news-editorial/print journalism industry? The newspaper decline statistics seem serious.
-30-
Marvelous.
Reminds of some of the off-the-record stories told around the ancient leather couch in the City Hall press room when I was granted admission in the early '90s.
Thanks for the stroll down memory lane, and thanks for working in the present.
Sorry for bad spelling (feign, rather than faint), and probably grammar mistakes often. I usually comment on a couple hours of sleep and am just glad that something coherent comes out at all.
Hey Roger, I've always been a big fan and my dream has always been to someday become a film critic. You mentioned that you first started writing film reviews for a paper at sixteen. I'm fifteen and this sounds like heaven to me, do you think it would be possible for a sixteen year old today to make it in the world of film criticism or have times changed too much?
By the way, it was your book, The Great Movies that got me obsessed with deconstructing film, so basically thanks a lot for giving me my calling.
Ebert: School paper? Local paper?
Or just start contributing to the web. Use your own name; pseudonyms are pointless.
Roger,
My dad, Robert Hainey, worked with you at the Sun Times until his death in 1970. My brother, Mike, is an editor at GQ who followed in his journalistic footsteps.
The stories really helped fill in some missing pieces of my dad's life as well as the photo of Jim Hoge watching the moon landing. I remember my dad working the night editor shift when that happened.
Thank you for putting this on the record for us and everyone of the Sun Times family.
Chris Hainey
Ebert: Your dad was a god in the newsroom.
Mr. Ebert,
You taught a class some years ago on Kieslowski's "Decalogue". I was wondering if you had ever thought of expanding that teaching experience into a full length book. Having read your review of the work, it seems to me that there was too much that was left unsaid, simply due to the amount of print space that you were given. I'd be curious to see how this series was interpreted by your students under your tutelage. Personally, I think that any further commentary that you could make about this series would be most
welcome.
On an equally personal note, I just want you to know how much I value you writing. Pound for pound, I think you are one of the greatest writers in this country right now. I read your reviews not necessarily for the recommendations (although that is one reason), but more for the style, ease and grace of your writing. Your reviews have taught me as much, if not more, about writing than they have about film. But either way, I come out a winner.
Your friend,
David Kling
Loved your reminiscing. I grew up in the 60's, on the South Side of Chicago, the most beautiful city in the world. I remember reading the newspaper from beginning to end, while lying on the floor with those huge pages all spread out. My grandfather came here from the old country in 1911 at 18, a penniless peasant. He read many papers every day I remember, till he died in 1993 at 100. Ok, maybe he quit reading them a few yrs prior. But still. Where else could one learn everything one needed to know? yeah we got the internet now with the worldwide web, big deal. Most of it is hearsay & has no authentication value. Sure some reporters speak false, but it is ALWAYS found out, since only about a zillion other people read it & speak out! Online, that can't happen - a lie passes unchallenged, and there is no method of correction. But print something false in a newspaper and BAM! the public calls you on it!
Something about the beauty of reading newsprint held in your hand. A laptop just cannot match that comfort!
Roger--You are "spot on." There is no better life.
I spent some years in my twenties as a news photog on The Kankakee Daily Journal, in the early-to-mid-1970s. Back then, newspapers (and single-image news photography before the heyday of video and throw-away images) were still important. News came primarily from newspapers, and from radio and the three big TV networks on the broadcast side. Working on a daily was a big deal and the most exciting life you could imagine.
It was the best job I ever had--a license to be curious, with lessons in life every day from events and people of great character (and little character) both inside and outside the newsroom. When all hell broke loose, I had to be THERE to cover it for our readers: airplane crashes, car collisions, murders, fires, explosions, train derailments, pro sports, weather disasters, political big-wigs in town (plus a few mild-mannered features)--you name it, I was there. Wow!
Newsrooms were raucous playgrounds of wild personalities, with, grit, profanity, and (still then) some booze. One of the managers, when a reporter earlier in the century, packed a '38 on his rough-and-tumble beat. The wire machines still clattered, but were replaced--a few years after I started there--with the electronic burp of dot-matrix printers. We switched from letterpress to offset, typewriters to typing copy aligned on special yellow paper, with esoteric codes to queue the scanner for first-generation computer typesetting.
We had a love-hate relationship with the local police because they sometimes screwed up and we covered it. So they looked at us suspiciously. On the other hand, we had a love-love relationship with firemen because they always came out as life-saving heros in our coverage, as they really were. Great guys, all.
We covered George Ryan many years before he became governor, when he was a state representative from there, part of the local Republican machine. I once tried to photograph him on an election night as he hobnobbed with the local political boss, commiserating about a bad showing at the polls. Ryan's right-hand-man muscled me out the door, so I got the shot through a window. (Even then, Ryan had this squinty-eyed and clenched-jaw expression that gave out creepy vibes like the hit man's stone-cold driver in the movie "Bullitt.")
We developed our film with noxious chemicals and printed on photographic paper in darkrooms. Technical innovation in photography was limited to higher ASA films and the introduction of resin-coated paper, allowing us to wash and dry prints faster--accelerated by a hair dryer--so we could run the pix out to the newsroom quicker. There were no digital cameras, e-mailed graphics files, or PhotoShop then. The only piece of jewelry I ever wore was a Nikon FTN of F-1 SLR with a motor drive.
The rule of the thumb for the photogs for covering spot news in a two-man team with a reporter was NEVER let the reporter drive. Reporters actually observed traffic laws, typically arriving too late for us to grab a news-as-it-was-happening shot. So, we photogs would insist on driving.
I'll never forget the smell of ink and newsprint--perfume! On Saturday nights I would take dates back to the press room to see the Sunday edition roll off the presses. Always made a good impression, that.
We dreamed on getting on a metro daily. Some did manage to get on the Trib or Sun-Times later.
Several years ago, I returned to visit a colleague still on the paper. I learned that the whole union shop was gone, and the large pasteup crew was replaced by only a few persons using QuarkXPress.
After my photog years, I flew a desk as an editor on weeklies and magazines. Wasn't the same, though. It is torment when you're welded to your seat when the sirens run past, and you can't leave the office to chase them.
As a kid, I steeped myself in old reporter memoirs, worked on the school paper, and freelanced for the local weekly. All drilled into me the discipline of accuracy, and concise and vivid writing. We were inspired by Chicago newspaper lore--tales of succinct headlines such as "Tot slays six in ax fest" ("Slay" always sounded like strange usage to me--so Biblical. Then I realized that it had a shorter character count, in writing heads, than "murder" and provided a dramatic alternative to the overused "kill.") and "Dentist arrested for filling wrong cavity" (about a dentist who took liberties with female patients under anesthesia, a headline that was reputed to have lasted only one edition before being yanked).
As a J major at NIU on the GI Bill, I was taught mostly by pros, grizzled journalism vets. There were only a few milquetoast academic types (one of whom told us he managed to mess up his only real journalism slot during a summer job on the commodities beat for UPI in Milwaukee). Some years after I graduated, NIU merged the J department with--good God!--the Media Studies Department and the journalism program lost its (then) ACEJ accreditation. The program is now called the "Communications" Department and the ACEJ is now the ACEJMC (MC = Mass Communications). Ugh.
Newspaper editorial staffs used to be populated mostly by blue-collar types who were reality-based and could relate better to their news sources and readers. Today they are filled with middle-class kids who don't want to report the news--instead, they want to save the world. Or, rather, THEY want to be seen as saving the world.
The magic is gone.
Ebert: As a downstater, this should ring a bell:
Oblong Man Marries Normal Girl
Hello Roger,
Thanks for taking us all back with you. It's been more than a decade since my byline rolled off a press, and I still think of it every day.
My experience never had the scope yours does -- I was at a community paper -- but we had presses in the building, dammit, and a newsroom without cubes or dividers, and a bartender who started setting 'em up when she saw us getting out of our cars.
Since those days, since I went to the dark side (*cough* PR), I've done work I'm proud of, alongside people I admire. But I still think of myself as a displaced reporter. It's my ingrained identity -- sort of like the thinner, fitter self I "see" in the mirror instead of really looking. It always will be.
And now, as the great mastheads fall and the profession staggers, I ought to feel good about the choices that took me away from the danger.
So why do I wish, more now than I have in years, that I were back there with all of you?
I'm sure you're in touch with a lot of colleagues whose lives are crashing down. Please let them know, for what little it's worth, that others out here are pulling for them.
I came into the newspaper business about five years ago, nine months out of college. The objective on my resume read: "To live in a newsroom."
I was a copy editor. We would put the paper to bed every night, after eight hours of calling and arguing with reporters, arguing with each other, checking phone directories, writing and rewriting headlines, laying out pages, debating style, debating films, grumbling, making plans for drinks afterward, proofreading. I was always a bit of a nite owl (I'm writing this at 12:41 a.m.), so I didn't mind getting out some nights as late as 1:30 to put out the final edition. How I miss getting copies of the first edition and checking them for errors. I remember the smell of fresh pages slightly damp with ink. I remember meeting up with my fellow editors and some of the younger reporters for 25 cent wings and dollar Yuenglings. I remember coming in early to design and build weekend feature pages, and I remember leaving late some nights after late-breaking news forced us to rearrange pages with minutes to spare before the drop-dead.
But it's about survival now, and I work at a newswire, producing real-time headlines and stories for electronic sources. The news is real, but it's not alive. There are no pages to proof, no tight headline specs to conquer, no dummy sheets. Here I am, not yet 30, just about a year removed from my newspaper experience, and I feel like I'm mourning an era. Am I too young to feel like a man without a country?
Thank you, Mr. Ebert, for writing this, for eulogizing a life I once romanticized as a boy and then had the pleasure to live - if only for a short time - as a man. I'm a born newspaperman just starting my life as the business dies. Well, as Brian Wilson once wrote, "I guess I just wasn't made for these times."
My dad was an advertising writer who worked in the Wrigley Building in the 60's. I still remember him pointing out the Sun-Times Building to me and telling me that's where the greatest reporters worked. Hadn't thought about that in a long time. Thanks for the wonderful jog down Memory Lane (a.k.a. Michigan Avenue) Roger!
For me, what defines a great Newspaper is the quality of its content, not the page layout design. You can keep all your bells and whistles, thank-you very much, as I actually don't have a short attention span or ADD. That said, and because I was curious to see what the front page of the Chicago Sun-Times actually looks like, I ran a Google image search - and look what came up! Oh the irony!
http://www.mcnblogs.com/mcindie/archives/images/RogerSunTimes_7.jpg
September 25, 2007
"EBERT'S NO.1"
"Forbes Says Sun-Times Film Critic Is Nation's Top Pundit."
Note: I love the little picture at the bottom of the Iranian President - "Welcome Cruel Dictator." As gosh, folks in Chicago sure are friendly. I should have no trouble getting into the University Club of Chicago. :)
As for the Chicago Sun-Times, I've read the online version and seen that you guys are trying to secure the 2016 Olympics, eh? Word to the wise - you can't afford it. Chicago Olympic bid officials say the cost of presenting a summer games in 2016 would be $3.3 billion; yeah, they always say that. Truth? It's going to cost WAY more, send real estate prices souring, and new development will push the poor and homeless out, as greedy land developers in bed with big business and Hotel chains look to cash in, while city officials jockey for position during photo ops. And no, I wasn't in favor of the 2010 Winter Olympics being held in Vancouver. We can't afford it either and we'll be paying for it for decades.
Chicago's already a great city, you don't need the bragging rights; be content. Just my two Canadian cents. :)
Ebert: And the 3-D was simply another turn of the screw.
And greed the hand that turns it until you feel like you're inside a vice. The quickest way to make a buck, is to aim for the lowest common denominator in a targeted demographic and then pander to it until it stops working. And right now, they're apparently convinced that the future lies with the gamer generation (which is all about 3D visuals) who'll presumably be more inclined to go see a "cartoon" if it looks more like what they're playing at home on a computer. At least that's the cynicism I see behind it, the greater "why" behind "why are they pushing it?"
Note: if you go the Dreamworks website, you'll be able to see how their stock is trading and watch clips recounting their "invaluable" partnership with Hewlit-Packard. I took a look through the production area and yup, that's how it was for me; digital comp, computers everywhere and not a single open beer.
The last studio I worked for has now branched off into games; so there ya go, eh? And whenever there's an action based film, seems there's always a game tie-in now. Buy a ticket, buy the DVD, buy the toy, buy the game; sigh. Mind you that said, I did enjoy playing those Harry Potter games - but that's because you could explore! Half the time I wasn't even playing it, I was just snooping through the library or the potions lab and admiring the creativity that went into the design. (I always remember how Alan Rickman praised the efforts of the painters & craftsmen who'd created that world; the production sets) and why I made a Quiddich Tower for my Jazz CD collection - as a homage to them for I couldn't rebuilt Hogwarts. :)
And so there's a good example now, of what technology can do when it's trying to do more than just make a buck off you. It can help tell a good story and inspire and feed your imagination.
And Monster vs. Aliens only inspired my disinterest. I bought a Wall-E toy but that's because the little dude had a heart as big as Quantum Mechanics! I can hear him humming inside my head as I type moreover - "Put on your Sunday clothes, there's lots of world out there, dum-dum-dum-dum, get out the brilliantine and dime cigars... We're gonna find adventure in the evening air, girls in white in a perfumed night, where the lights are bright as the STARS...! - from Hello Dolly. :)
Wall-E restored my faith in Animation in the wake of technology's inroads into the medium, and the screw that always seems at the ready to squeeze. It proved that you CAN make money - and a lot of it, when you leave Artist's alone and let them do their thing.
Tell a story with some heart and soul.
And the same applies to Newspapers. If reporters ran them, America would be a smarter place, no? Maybe you'd all be contenders for the Nation's best pundit. :)
P.S. I watched "Let the Right One In" the other night, but I didn't watch it with the butchered English subs. I listened instead to the dubbed dialogue and are you ready for this - it's the same as the text that appeared onscreen for the theatrical release. So the context is back now, but sadly, the voice actors they chose don't really match the bodies they're attached to. In some cases, the bullies sounded like they were girls.
Cheap bastards.
Dear Mr Ebert,
Having taken us for this nostalgic ride, it would be great if you could blog about the first story and the first review you filed for Sun Times. Or, is this asking too much?
Everyone needs an editor...how true.
I forgot the 'c' in Art Petacque...
cheers! nancy
I would pause before assuming that a world without major newspapers is automatically diminished. There is the ecological issue. Also,
Politically, it could be a bonus. No doubt individual voices are heard better in newspaper print, more so than any blog. The reason is due to the centralization of power than enables that voice to be heard. Capital and technological dominance combine to create an oligopoly, a circle of non-competitiveness. No doubt, quality is part of the equation, especially when you ask those involved in producing it. But the fact is you have a highly centralized source of `news` and information with an agenda - that is, a point of view: the political values of the Sun Times or the Tribune may or may not be worth much but they will be the widest circulated.
It is possible that the `blog-o-sphere` and similar forms of communication and commentary may act to decentralize and thus defuse dominant agendas, or at least rival. It could be relatively faceless (or, freer from the cult of personality. And, lets face it, thats what mainstream is all about, how to peddle a `personality`). But, recent years have provided an excellent example of its ability to vibrate when mainstream medias were paralyzed.
But as power never exists in a vacuum, neither does resistance. The quality of decentralized alternatives of mass-media requires a quality of the masses. And, wherever there are the masses there are those who can smell a profit. Special interests groups will become bed-fellows to further the agenda of each. In cue we have threats to security and social moral fibre inviting calls to censure and limit access. Failing that, technological dominance will prevail: as with real estate, prime virtual estate will be artifically created via rules of access: those that pay more will get more, will be seen more. The oligopolies will again begin to congeal.
No doubt, the relative ease of internet media does lead to a lot of crap. But it can also vibrate with clarity and force, for those with ears to hear (`if a tree falls....`). Those who would limit access certainly realize this.
Which of the following is true: does/did the Sun Times exist for the benefit of its contributers/readers or for the benefit of its advertizers? If both, what does that signify politically? There may be pros and cons, and of course, POV.
-30-.
That's my vote for best newspaper movie. Jack Webb, William Conrad, and the immortal song, "Copy Boy." Conrad has a great riff about how disposable newspapers are, and the various undignified ways people use them (lining parakeet cages was one), but for a nickel or a dime, it was money best spent.
This was wonderful to read and brought back some great stories that my old boyfriend Terry Gorman used to tell me. He also worked for the Daily News and Sun Times as well as the Lerner papers. One of my favorites took place in 1978 when all the night shift workers were ready to leave and something came across the wire. Terry was the first to read it and shouted out "The god damn Pope just died!" Needless to say, no one went anywhere for many hours.
Another thing I experienced first hand was when Terry and I and another reporter friend Les Sussman were at the old Aragon Ballroom watching a rock concert and the crowd started throwing chairs around. I ducked behind some chairs and tried to protect myself but Terry and Les stood up to get a better view. I half expected them to pull out their notebooks. That, for me, was the epitome of what a reporter is all about. Thanks for writing these great pieces, Roger.
Ebert: Gorman was Royko's leg man!
Boy, I loved this...
In 1970, I started as a copy boy/obit writer at The Sunday Courier and Press and stayed in newspapers for the next 30 years -- ending my career as a reporter for The Indianapolis Star.
I loved it so much I used to tell people that I would pay to have my job. I think there was a whole genetics industry that used to turn out characters who were so unfit for any other human occupation that they had no other choice but to find a home in newspapers.
By the time my career was winding down, those smoky city rooms, boozy reporters, and wild antics in and out of the office and the bar across the street had become legends.
I am so glad that I was a part of it.
One of my newsroom memories is working the features copy desk on Oscar night in '86. Our reporter on the scene in California fed in copy so perfect to begin with that I could've stayed home. And right on time, too. But then, this guy was always nice to copy editors. He was once sent a case of marshmallow fluff -- or it might have been Miracle Whip? -- and brought it out to the desk to offer it to us. Odd, but appreciated. The care and feeding of copy editors is an oft-neglected art.
When I tell my stories about the good old days of newspapers, that guy's the one I use to impress people about the greats I worked with.
Oh, right. That was you.
Ebert: Mistaken identity. I gave away a case of marshmallow fluff?
How about "Teacher's Pet," could you make women weak in their knees like Clark Gable?
Ebert: Me?
Ebert: I like middle-of-the-road CNN. There is something wrong with Glenn Beck and Bill O'Reilly. They're the Jerry Springers of conservatism.
I've said this before, but...
Glenn Beck is who discovered Sarah Palin and on that momentous first interview he asked her if she were vetted for the Vice Presidential position would she accept, and she said she would be honored. This was about 3 months prior of its actualization.
No Glenn Beck, no Sarah Palin. But Barack Obama was going to win anyway. But I felt the polling was a little insane (I've said this too) and it made me not even want to go to the voting booth. On television there were polls every hour for a week or so all the way up to the election, and Barack was leading all the way up to election time. And I just don't think we need to poll every hour. Do a poll once every week, not once every hour.
Thanks for today. My mom used to subscribe to several newspapers: Chicago American, the Tribune, Sun-Times, the Daily News and the Defender. I read everything. I truly miss the exceptional writing in some of those papers.
Thanks Roger. I remember it well.
"All the President's Men" was the first movie that really drew me in. I love sound with movies, and that's what did it: the whispering of Robert Redford. I like talkies, and in life to hear people speaking, not talking. You know when you hear people speaking and it makes your hair stand up on your head or the way sounds can do that? Animals seem to naturally do this all the time in a magical way. There's a kind of poetry to how the move about.
Old soldiers fade away - but what do old reporters do when their paper closes? Some try to start their own "newspaper" (in quotations because there's no newsprint involved).
INDenverTimes
I've subscribed, not because I live in Denver (I don't) or because my husband worked at the Rocky for a brief time years ago (he did) - but because I want to see this enterprise succeed. I want to see a what a news organization run by the real guts of newspapers (reporters, editors, copyeditors, etc.) will look like. This is a new world, and I bet it doesn't have cubicles.
Your column has "aged" to the point where it gives one the sense of fraternity and belonging you refer to. Waiting to read it properly....
Your column has "aged" to the point where it gives one the sense of fraternity and belonging you refer to. Waiting to read this properly....
> Oblong Man Marries Normal Girl
I've always thought that Letterman should've sent Biff, in his Travels Across America, to the town of Oblong, to take some pictures of the funny signs, and interview the locals about them. My favorite, which is actually there: "Oblong Girls Softball Field". He could've asked them, "Are the softballs oblong? Or the field? Or the girls?"
The specifics of your stories are, of course, unique, but I sure recognized that thread running through them that knits all of us together who have spent any part of our lives in a newsroom -- brothers in arms bivouacked on the front line of information. My news career never went beyond my college newspaper, but I sure remember that energy in the air when getting the facts straight took on an importance, an urgency that gave my life a texture I haven't felt since. Considering the state of the news industry now, I feel fortunate that I don't work in it... but I can't watch a movie like Ron Howard's "The Paper" without feeling a sense of loss. Thanks for the wonderful writeup!
Roger, this piece is beyond wonderful Thank you.
Ebert: The Alan Solomon?
Ever since watching All the President's men for the first of what seems like 4 dozen times, I've been intrigued by the Gelstalt and culture of the newsroom.
Unfortunately, the closest I ever got was for four years (missing only one day, I'm still proud to say) making that bundle of tightly tied newsprint into something deliverable and then trudging around and getting it to the homes in my neighborhood. Only ocassionally would I have reason to visit the mother ship (the Hartford Courant) -- and it was always an oddly fascinating place.
Incidentally, I think the Ron Howard movie, "the Paper" is a very underrated and not-too-frequently-mentioned, but compelling and well-acted, movie about some of these themes.
Your special talent is to make people feel as though they have been to the places you write about. I can imagine how it felt to be in a newsroom like that now.
Out of interest have you ever read a short science fiction story, I believe it is by Frederick Pohl, about the invention of 'boxes' that can transport you instantly from place to place, meaning that every reporter carries only a camera and some money, and that newsrooms are deserted because all that is needed is an editor in a little room. Felt like a representation of the future.
Also I spotted on your reply to another reader's comment, that you have just read Norweigan Wood by Haruki Murakami. If you have a chance, then do read 'Hard Boiled Wonderland and the End of the World' by the same author- an absolute masterpiece of a book.
I woke up in the middle of the night last night and read this wonderful article that you wrote. Thank you!
But I have to know about that story concerning the photographer and Fermi. Was the photographer just being a wisenheimer (in which case it is still a fine joke)?
Or was he actually that naive?
The image of a tired, bored, harried, and/or clueless, photographer actually suggesting the photos is one of the funniest things I have heard in some time.
Sorry if you have already replied.
Thanks again.
Ebert: It is a familiar story in Chicago, said to be true. McPhaul wrote from personal familiarity.
Don't forget, Superman was a newspaper man, working as reporter Clark Kent for the Daily Planet. Now, what super hero would Roger look like if he took those glasses off? And, would Lois Lane make the connection?
I wonder if the Daily Planet has gone online like everyone else?
I have mixed feelings about this post. I got into newspapering about five years ago for the allure of daily reporting. It's a fun gig, to be sure. Often thrilling. But it's damn hard and certainly dying. A number of my friends have been canned. I was laid off myself in December. I'm sad and angry that I missed out on all the good times.
I'm also tired of all you old timers sounding off on the glory days of papers. It's all over. Time to wash the ink off our fingers and move on already. Let's find a new way a way to make daily reporting a viable business enterprise.
CBS's Sunday Morning had a good report on the death of newspapers a couple weeks ago. One of the sources summed up a feeling I've had for months when he said something along these lines: What this country needs is great journalism, not newspapers.
When I was 14, I was taken on a tour of the Boston Globe. I remember the gigantic printing presses, the enormous rooms lined with desk after desk, the sounds of all those typewriters clicking and clacking and all the people rushing around. I thought to myself, here is where it happens…information comes in and these folks digest, check and then re-check the facts, then turn them into all those stories that would bring the world into focus. This was just about the same time of “All The President’s Men”. And even at that age, I just kept thinking how important all of this was.
Recently, for job reason, I have relocated back to Boston. And what were the headlines this past weekend?
That the Boston Globe might actually be shut down.
We have changed. No doubt about it. And even though intellectually I understand the economics that might lead to this unfortunate event, I also know that the thought of this would have seemed unimaginable to people of that era.
Why is it that we can’t protect and preserve a way of life that enriches us all and is ultimately in our best interest? Why can’t we grasp that when we adopt something new that something of equal, or even more, value is lost? In the span of just 30 or so years, we have destroyed the vitality of our towns and cities by supporting and shopping at the Wal-Marts of our time just to save a few bucks. Now, the newspapers, that were the informational life blood of those communities, are also being tagged for extinction.
Yes, I understand the role and value of the internet. But nothing, in my mind heart and soul, can replace the joy of holding and reading the daily and weekend editions of my newspapers. And there is something profoundly sad in the knowledge that, out there, in those cavernous rooms, the typing may cease and the presses might actually stop.
I don't mention this to be self serving...but when my first novel was published, my Irish Italian momma would hang around the book racks and when someone selected one of my titles to purchase she would introduce herself and ask the person, "I'm kerry's mother,I can have this book personalized and autographed for you if you would like." and if the buyer said "Yes," my mom would open to the title page and scrawl "To __________ ,with all best wishes, Kerry Newcomb's mother." And wander happily off down the aisle to hang around the paperbacks.
She was something...
oh dear, now the world knows "of inframan" is not my last name! Oh wait, the world could care less! Ha.
Write 'em cowboy.
Ebert: I just amazoned you.
Good gravy!
Just wondering ... is anyone at the Sun-Times going to answer Bill O'Reilly's "Reality Check" from last week about the bankruptcy? Big O says it's because the S-T is now radical left ("secular progressive" in Billospeak); his "proofs" including that the paper dropped his column. It's never a good idea to ignore something like this; you guys may still have the barrels full of ink, but Billo is sent by satellite all around the world and out of town. Rolling over and playing dead like Letterman did won't do the job. Someone from the Sun-Times needs to shove his falsehoods right between his beady little eyes - as publicly as possible.
Ebert: I've written a little memo to Bill that will appear on the site later this evening.
Putting Citizen Kane aside (a film you saw 75 times by 1989), what do you think is the greatest film about newspapers or the newspaper industry?
Ebert: "All the President's Men," or, in a completely different way, "Sweet Smell of Success."
I dig what you're saying Mr. Ebert. You do indeed have a wonderful job. I think one thing that makes a profession great is the fraternity of coworkers in the field. You share experiences and feelings that only other reporters can truly relate to. I found it interesting that you appreciated All The President's Men as an authentic-feeling newspaper movie. I thought so too, from the outside. I wonder if you find very many others with such an authentic atmosphere. I'm a doctor (and by the way, thanks for all the nice things you've said about the healing professions lately) and I find medical movies rarely seem realistic. In fact I can't think of even one. This is not to say there are not great movies, I think MASH helped inspire me a little to go into the field. But MASH doesn't look like anything I have ever seen. It turned out more like The Hospital with George C. Scott. Well, a little--life isn't quite that bleak!
I would think most worthwhile professions have this quality that only its own practitioners appreciate. Who would have thought that about pro wrestling before The Wrestler? Every profession needs its own Great Movie.
My dearest Mr. Ebert,
I know your romance.
'The Paper' was a peephole into the possible. Your mind just spurs at the idea of a crime reporter that sleeps in the asst managing editor's office, and with a loaded gun no less. And nevermind the byline; your first front page headline... it's validation, recognition and your first real feather-in-the-resume (or so you thought), all rolled into one. And the girls who were not so impressed; well they'll come round (or so you...).
However, six years into the newsline, the body's holding up but the spirit's not faring too well. So much negativity, and the pay... is decidedly not upper-middle class.
No respect for press freedom here (therefore no press freedom) and I now believe in the sad fact that nothing will change anytime soon. An appreciation of freedom, truly, does not germinate everywhere.
I stopped believing in a few things, and so parts of the excitement of the possible and the subsequent youthful endeavours to pursue them, passed on too.
But I was given an option Mr. Ebert, by my increasingly worried decidedly middle-class parents. Finish your masters in finance and find a job in America.
Hence my connundrum. I shall love to buy a home in the valley overlooking a vineyard for my mother. I shall love to get my father a silly meaty fancy vehicle. I shall love to be, for once, an anchor in every way an older brother should be.
But I yearn too, the view on the other side. To maybe fall in love with a fellow reporter and she with you, and to travel the world with her. She exists, she's there. To maybe do extraordinarily stupid things, like cover a conflict (and to later hypocritically condemn all war). Maybe you saw something else profound, described it and have your words, the pictures you sickeningly composed, immortalised like the 80 year-old National Geographic mags you privately read in awe in the school library.
But there's another side to me I am just discovering; a cold analytical detachment. Nothing, I found, works in absence of the human condition. I'm not stupid after all.
So at long last, the question;
The unloving money or passion that may fizzle out, leaving you high, dry and broke?
Ever gratefully yours,
Richard
P.S. I'm not American and so, what a blessing it felt to have come across your website two years ago.
Your writings not only made me better appreciate film-making, but also (re-)taught me never to discount how morality and empathy can play a role in the movie experience. I feel less embarrased now in believing in the vast complexity of our own realities, in all its varying shades, and in the goodness of men that they are capable of.
I should enjoy coming to your annual film festival, but alas, the economics of reality do not agree.
PS 2 I suspect what Mr. Siskel might have said (and done with a rolled-up newspaper). But with his friend, my mind draws a blank. God bless you.
Nice post. I felt the same way about the newspaper business in college, when I made a lengthy daily commute for an unpaid internship at weekly newspaper just so I could get some clips. My feelings remained the same as I worked hard freelancing for tens of dollars a story the next few years and when I was hired full-time at a tiny newspaper when I was still a student. My salary kept me at just above the poverty line and I could never pay my rent on time, but I was happy.
After about a year, I got a better paying job at a bigger and well-known paper. That was less than four years ago, and things have really hit the fan since. I got out of the business a little less than a year ago because I knew I was on a sinking ship and I'm no optimist. I've seen Titanic. I wonder what J-school students are planning to do when they graduate. There are only 158 newspaper jobs listed nationwide at journalismjobs.com at the moment. The days of young people paying their dues and ending up at papers like the New York Times and the Boston Globe are over; they're too busy laying people off to hire anyone.
I've known for years that newspapers were dying, but I never expected the business to disintegrate so rapidly. I used to think they'd be around in some form for at least decades, but now I dunno. It's true that most news today comes from papers -- most bloggers just regurgitate what's already been published elsewhere -- but I wonder how much people actually care about things like objectivity and fact checking.
I used to get exhilarated watching Ron Howard's The Paper, but I think it'd depress me today. Those days are long gone.
Mr. Ebert, thanks for that column.
I'm 41 and fear I won't make it to 50 in this business. It breaks my heart. Not for me, but for all the great stories not being told. For all the youngsters, who'll never know the thrill of deadline, because they're updating and Twittering 24/7. Newspaperman used to be a tribe. We'd work together, eat together, play together. The Internet doesn't offer that sense of community, even with Facebook.
Thanks again.
Sincerely,
A newspaperman
Marshall Fields is consumed by Macys. Standard Oil is consumed by British Petroleum. Schwinn Bicycles' name is purchased by another bicycle company. Florsheim Shoe's name is purchased by another shoe maker. Sears and Carsons caught in middle-retailing purgatory and
Sears Tower is no longer called by that name. Weiboldts, The Fair,
Montgomery Wards, Polk Brothers, all gone. Jays Potato Chips is purchased by another snack maker and moves out. The Campbell's Soup plant is demolished. The Skyway is leased out. Midway Airport may be leased out. Chicago American. Chicago Today. Chicago Daily News. The Big 89. Super CFL. The Tribune in bankruptcy. Even the White Sox almost moving to Florida in the late '80s. The list goes on and on, and every Chicagoan could make their own list of lost treasurers. Chicago isn't just changing, it's disappearing. Chicago icons and institutions are being wiped off the face of the map or are being consumed by people in other cities or across the oceans. Younger generations won't miss any of these things because they didn't know any of these things. But we know the Sun-Times, and if it goes, we'll
miss it deeply and feel the loss of something important, something truly Chicago. And sadly, we'll just add yet another name to list of things that were... Chicago.
God I was born too late...
As a former Sun-Times copyeditor (1979-1984), I enjoyed reading this tremendously. Besides beers and burgers at Billy Goat's Tavern, one of my favorite Sun-Times memories was the filming of "Continental Divide" in the newsroom. They used a bunch of us as extras, fed us lobster and paid us $100 a day, which was a fortune back then. I'll never forget being on an elevator with John Belushi, his sister and his nephew. What a thrill. My other great memory is having the great film critic Roger Ebert stop by the copy desk to tell a few jokes before heading off to write his column. The jokes were so funny that we'd laugh so hard, we would cry. Then off you would saunter to write a review. Ahh, the memories.
Ebert: Hi, Mae! Anyone telling those jokes today would be fired for a long list of offences against PC.
I'm 52 and have worked off and on in the newspaper/publishing business all my life, in between other, more well-paying jobs. Two weeks ago, I was hired as a reporter for small weekly newspaper. I'm almost as excited as I was when I got that first byline in my high school paper. I know how you feel, Roger. Seeing your work in print is an almost-orgasmic feeling for those of us disposed to journalism. At the same time, I can understand how others who don't share our passion couldn't care less if newspapers survive. Too often, journalists act as though they are entitled to special privileges that other people aren't. We give ourselves too many awards. But it is a marvelous, magical field to work in and I feel sorry for those who haven't experienced it.
When Steinberg mentioned the Sun-Times bankruptcy filing in his column the day after the event--a comically steely response to hypothetical television reporters--I was grimly amused. Then Roeper posts a lengthy remembrance of his two-decade career at the paper on his blog, reprinted in Sunday's edition, and while it was quite good, it was also rather unsettling in the wake of this recent news. And now Roger Ebert waxes poetic on his early career in the newspaper business, and I am officially in a full-blown panic. I love the Sun-Times, been a suscriber for years, as had been my Dad, who refused to even look at the Trib because "they're non-union!" I even re-upped my subscription just today thru EZ Pay, which I am normally wary of, only because the phone solicitor, of whom I am normally even more wary of, was so kind and pleasant and might even WORK for this great company. I do not wish it to go away! I wince when I read other comments (not neccesarily here) almost GLEEFUL that this important American institution, the family newspaper, is in decline. How is scrolling down the bright screen of a laptop preferable to casually leafing through the paper? Really? You think it's better? At the breakfast table with a bagel and juice? In the workplace lunchroom over a sandwich and salad? On the living room easychair, drink at hand? In the bathroom???
I thought I saw that the core issue right now for the Sun-Times is a tax debt of some $600 million dollars, another lovely parting gift from Conrad Black. Apparently shutting off the escalators in the old Wabash building did little to fill company coffers. And Mark Steyn was still defending his old boss in print, even as Lord Black was being fitted for his prison pajamas. It is infuriating.
I sincerely hope the Sun-Times comes out of this OK, and continues to engage its readers for years to come. I'm even secretly rooting for the Tribune to survive, too. Why not? What do you think keeps the politicians of both political parties in this state from blatant thievery? The papers force them to at least be crafty about it.
And, Roger, your writing has always struck me as like having a casual conversation with an immensely intelligent friend. With you doing most of the talking, of course. And me nodding in bemused agreement. This article is nothing short of outstanding.
P.S. Someone was asking for writing advice, someone else mentioned a book by Stephen King. I saw something he wrote years ago in a writer's handbook, and lo and behold, it's on the Internets. Probably one of the best essays I've ever read about writing. Witty and concise. By Stephen King! Who knew??? It's called "Everything You Need to Know About Writing Successfully - in Ten Minutes." Here's the link: http://mikeshea.net/Everything_You_Need_to_Kn.html
With all the newspapers closing their doors recently, your words are a strong reminder of why they are still an important part of our culture. I enjoy hi-tech advances as much as the next person (Who doesn’t love being able to squish 3 gazillion songs into a device the size of the cashew?), however the solitary nature of the internet doesn’t really lend itself to developing the kind of fond memories you so eloquently shared with us. Even though we’re all technologically connected, it’s from a safe and rather impersonal distance. Who’s going to have great, adventurous recollections to pass along from their days spent ferociously texting on the living room sofa? How would they get anecdotes of camaraderie with wacky coworkers named Milton? Which episodes with their mentor could they reflect upon if they never had an opportunity to find one? Where the heck would they ever get to meet Mike Royko?
And honestly, is there even an web-based equivalent for ‘Stop the Presses!’? Would some craggy newsman yell from the floor: “Press the DEL key!!!!!” Who wants to see Adolph Menjou in that movie?
Maybe people forget the decline of the hard copy isn’t just about losing yet another daily, it’s about losing the collective experiences that go along with it. The reason reporters have always been great characters for fictional inspiration is because there’s an element of romance and excitement associated with them. Imagine if Clark Kent, instead of being a newspaper man who changed into his superhero cape in a phone booth, were a blogger for the Daily Planet online and worked from his Barcolounger in a robe and bunny slippers. Yes, I’m sure Lois Lane would have been all over that. And poor Jimmy Olsen would be out of job altogether since the good citizens of Metropolis and their trusty camera phones could email breaking news photos directly to the Planet’s website. Not exactly the stuff of great mythology… or critical reporting.
If tangible newspapers do eventually disappear, future internet readers would miss out on the glorious smell of newsprint on their doorstep during a rainy day, the joys of making Silly Putty impressions with the funnies section and the sheer ecstasy of completing a weekend crossword puzzle with a ballpoint pen. But most of all they would never hear wonderful accounts from people behind the scenes about how their words made it from the press to the newsstands every day. Sometimes those are better stories than the ones that hit the front page.
Another delightful piece from your vivid memory. Although it's before your time and your workplace was probably more close to "All the President Men" or "Zodiac", your recollection reminds me of "Teacher's Pet". Time is like one-way road and I think newspapers will be a lot different even from now(Will "Marley & Me" become 'period movie'?)and will never go back. We have lots of these blogs nowadays, but I hope people will be looking for accurate sources in the end. Is survival of the most accurate just my dream?
For me, reading newspaper is better than looking at computer monitor because of my eye problems. My left eyeball usually gets painful after long hour of using computers(I have to do work, I have to watch movies, I have to write reviews....).
By the way, I have a journalist friend who is working at local newspaper. I will recommend the piece to him and ask his thought about it. I meet him not so frequently, and I've wondered how he works in the company these days.
I have always been curious about how you got your start in the newspaper business. These amazing stories where more than I could have hoped for, thank you for sharing them.
Hi Roger, since a large section of the newspaper world revolves around politics, I was wondering if you had experienced any squabbles about politics in the newspaper room.
Ebert: We all disagreed with management every time the paper endorsed Bush.
I have mixed feelings reading about what the news business used to be like. It's great that so many people got to experience the profession the way you describe it. I have been in the business for six years, ever since college graduation, and in the last two years have seen the entire industry collapse. I wanted this to be my career like all those journalists before me, but now it looks like that won't happen. It's really sad when you're doing something that you know is important but no one can seem to understand that, or those who can understand it don't know what to do about it. Two years ago our newsroom was full of eager young 20-somethings who loved their jobs and were poised to be the next generation of journalists. Now half of them have split for other careers, and those who remain are only waiting for the economy to improve or layoffs to force them out. I hope newspapers can survive, but for the present generation of journalists, it's over. It's a combination of people who are too old to adapt and those who are young enough to adapt but don't want to because it's no fun anymore.
In high-school, I had fantasies (delusions?) of being the Next Great American Writer. I wrote for my school paper, little things about sports and movies, and just about anything else I knew nothing about. I figured I would become a journalist after college "to pay the bills" while I fashioned my piece of literary nitro. I was immediately talked out of pursuing journalism (no money, respect, etc) and eventually dropped out of school altogether. I'm now 35 years old and feel like I missed something, something amazing. Did I close my window into the future, into my imagined dream? I'm haunted by the images of myself as a young man, feverishly working on my articles for the school paper, thinking someone might take me seriously.
Ebert: But you can still write.
I see all these people mourning the loss of newspapers of the past with reporting of the past. I see some people blame the change on cubicles, others on the Internet, but somebody must be to blame for all this change. After all somebody chose to switch from rows of open desks over to cubicles, and to invest in a website for their paper. Who is to blame? Science? Technology? Society? Maybe there are newspaper historians tracking this answer down, or maybe it's just not that important a matter to conduct studies around, or maybe the answer is obvious, but I must say I have heard more people complain about the change in the press than advocate it, and bewailing is much different than reminiscing.
I watched "The Incredibles" last night - an animated film I forgot to praise so I'm adding that to the list of ones to be admired, and this time out, I really noticed the "office lecture scene" between Bob Parr aka Mr. Incredible and his boss Gilbert Huph - the CEO of Insuricare, the corrupt corporate Hell where Bob works and evil the higher-ups do their utmost to keep the money for themselves and the bureaucrats/shareholders.
http://graphics8.nytimes.com/images/2004/11/05/arts/05incr.3.650.jpg
Gilbert Huph: I'm not happy, Bob. Not happy. Ask me why.
Bob: Okay. Why?
Gilbert Huph: Why what? Be specific, Bob.
Bob: Why are you unhappy?
Gilbert Huph: Your customers make me unhappy.
Bob: Why? Have you gotten complaints?
Gilbert Huph: Complaints I can handle. What I can't handle is your customers' inexplicable knowledge of Insuricare's inner workings. They're experts! Experts, Bob! Exploiting every loophole! Dodging every obstacle! They're penetrating the bureaucracy!
Gilbert Huph: You know, Bob... a company...
Bob: Is like an enormous clock.
Gilbert Huph: ...Is like an enormous cl... Yes, precisely! It only works if all the little cogs mesh together. A clock must be clean, well lubricated, and wound tight.
Yes indeed, like a tightly twisted screw. And in this case a clever critique of uniformity in America as represented by the dreaded cubicle, and those who make sure you stay in them. It's a satirical parody of suits everywhere; and an ironic one, given "Walt Disney" paid the bills for it. :)
I can only relate to the Newspaper industry owing to the parallels I can draw between that world and Animation/Film, so forgive me for bringing-up Animation yet again, but I feel the film speaks in part to what Roger and others have been lamenting in here. It's not romantic to work a 14 hour day or be sleep deprived and running on caffeine while trying to meet an insane deadline someone's pointing to the back of your head like a gun. The pressure of stress isn't fun, either. Rather, it was everything you got to do to off-set it. That's what changed. That's was been lost to life inside the cubicle and and needing to toe the corporate line.
Matt Monks wrote on April 6, 2009 3:42 PM – "I'm also tired of all you old timers sounding off on the glory days of papers. It's all over. Time to wash the ink off our fingers and move on already. Let's find a new way a way to make daily reporting a viable business enterprise."
On the surface, it can appear that way, ie: a bunch of old guys reminiscing about the good old days, but in this case I also think it's about what's actually changed now - and not for the better. I think that's the real lament.
At least it is for me. It's that screw Roger spoke of. It's how you "used" to be able to do your job. I mean, would anyone complain if they got to breathe a little more while working hard? Would anyone grumble if the suits treated them better? Wouldn't you like to spend more time actually doing your job as opposed to having to deal with corporate-minded terrorism?
Let's say there comes a day when Newspapers finally go out of business. And everything is now 100% digital News; however you get it. Now you're having to compete with literally EVERY SINGLE digital source out there, and if money is the bottom line, what's to prevent those online News agencies from going belly-up too? Unless like an issue of Vogue magazine, it's 80% advertising? Flash based bells and whistles, Newspapers with games on their websites or fed to your cel phone so you can play while reading about the President's visit to wherever while downloading an MP3 and Twittering with people updating their Facebook page.
The only thing that separates a Newspaper in the digital age is the fact it IS a Newspaper. It's made of paper. And what makes them special and how you can sell them. They're the ONE thing on the planet you DON'T need to download today. The one thing you don't have to wait for. In the hustle and bustle of your digital life, and the noise of so much vying for your attention and screaming at you over the screen, the Newspaper is your respite.
And I think the Chicago Sun-Times newspaper needs to tap into that. Not what it isn't, but what it is.
Peace and quiet.
The reason Bush was made fun of by comedians all the time is because he gave them such great material.
I'm not speaking of policy, I'm speaking of the ignorant yet condescending way Bush spoke to the electorate.
George Bush had no problem telling Americans,
"I'd make it a goal to make sure that local folks got to make the decision as to whether or not they said creationism has been a part of our history and whether or not people ought to be exposed to different theories as to how the world was formed."
-Nov. 14, 1999
This is incredibly, mind-numbingly stupid and it should have sent a red flag to all of us, press included. Anybody that would make this statement publicly is unfit for any office above dogcatcher, let alone President of the United States.
Obama doesn't offer as much material to comedians because he is thoughtful and articulate. I don't agree with everything President Obama has done, but I feel reassured that he knows what he is doing.
Stanley: I will be in Orlando from June 10 until the 17th of this year. Click on my name, which leads to "Contact Us" on the band's website. Email goes directly to Yours Truly. -David
What, did I wake up in a bizarro world where everyone's decided to adopt the British spellings of words?
Ebert: I hope we didn't put you in an ill humour. Have to run, my motor is double-parked at the kerb.
This doesn't need to be posted, but I thought I should share this site with you. Al Cross left the Louisville Courier Journal a few years ago after years spent as the top political writer in Kentucky. I was surprised he stayed as long as he did after the Bingham family sold the paper and it became part of the Gannett chain.
He now runs an institute at the University of Kentucky which is a resource and whatever for rural journalists. Not a city desk experience but definitely working with journalism as it finds itself today. The CJ used to have regional offices and covered the whole state. Now it has a very narrow focus.
http://irjci.blogspot.com
Institute for Rural Journalism and Community Issues
I worked as an editorial clerk and writing obituaries at Decatur's Herald and Review for about two months just before the dawn of the Internet. I am fortunate to have felt the buzz of an old-school newsroom, working late into the evening, and getting to experience things ranging from election-night excitement to boring research phone calls. It seems I was poised for some sort of apprenticeship with the Editor-in-Chief, but I was already planning my exit for other horizons. Good memories.
Hi Roger -- Thanks for the evocative portrait of the newsroom we shared. I've sent the URL to my children, both born after my Sun-Times days and now 35 and 30, so they'll have a sense of formative time in my life.
Roger,
I love this blog--I love it's "gee-whiz" spirit. And as a Milton fan, I figure at least some of this spirit comes from people (like you and Larry Weinberg) who make comments that allude to great writing--and who give the ol' touche to the rare jerk with a witty Thanks for that! It felt for a moment like I was back at the Goat's or who quotes the title of an Edith Piaf song. Maybe this is part of the gee-whiz attitude--people who read, think, engage instead of indulging the sad penchant I see so frequently where no one wants to be caught--dead or alive--caring about much of anything.
Gosh darn it all, I want to be in the midst of it myself, smoking a cigar, yelling at the copy boys, going mano-a-mano with the news...yes, write a book or a something about this.
(and by the way, "middleclassguy" or whoever you are, this "little person" over the years has received the odd kind, gracious response from a man you just called a bully. Shame on you--them's fightin' words to this blog following!)
Ebert: Since you are so kind, I will share with you my first draft of a reply to him:
'
Dear middleclass guy: Congratulations on your ascension.
By Matt Monks on April 6, 2009 3:42 PM
Let's find a new way a way to make daily reporting a viable business enterprise. What this country needs is great journalism, not newspapers.
Exactly. What is being mourned is a lifestyle, not a practise. And I think it remains to be seen how that practise cannot be remade and reborn. For Roger Ebert and comrads - you loved what you did. Good for you. Sincerely - good for you. You didnt waste what you had, as Im sure some do.
A lot of great memories there. Book form, if you please!!!
Here's my two cents. My last memory of a real typewriter in use was in St. Louis in the early '90's when a firey South Side Irish news writer physically hurled it at an obnoxious newsroom manager. The news writer got a couple unpaid days off for her rebelliousness, but the rest of us got a great newsroom memory.
Throwing a computer keyboard just doesn't provide the same satisfying crash.
Roger,
As I read this story, all I could think is that I wish you were 30 years younger or I was 30 years older, and we both were college together at the same time...you must have been a riot to party with. Although I'm not sure I'm cool enough to run with your crowd.
Ebert: Neither was I.
You seem to be responding to reader posts more than ever before with this article. You must truly love the newspaper business.
Newspapers going under. The printed word imperiled. Are we in the end of days? Will Nicholas Cage save us for another day. Is the Muppet version of The Devils of Loudon upon us? Can Kermit really channel Oliver Reed? Poor stuffed tortured soul.
Standing over Miss Piggy's grave I heard someone recite "Rashers to rashers, bangers to mash..."
But what is my point you may ask. Just this, kind sir. I still remember what you wrote about Billy Bob Thornton and how you fantasized the manner in which he accepted the role by rolling up the script, putting it to his head and "pulling the trigger". One of the funniest things I ever read. You have had other moments, clips that stay with me along with fragments of Dylan Thomas and T. S. Eliot and W. Shakepeare and Shaw, Ionesco, Arthur Miller...
I sure likes your stuff, Mister E.
Wonderful recollections... I do worry about the dumbing down of America. Newspapers laden with corporate think had sown the seeds of their own demise.
If this place where I work was in imminent danger of closure, I'd have no such memories. I have a respectable job with respectable people, but there are no characters.
Maybe that's what's happening to the workplace. We're all drones crushed of any spirit by mind-numbing routine and risk of poverty. Mike Judge captured it so well in Office Space.
Your magnificent memoir stirs so many memories of the hard-drinking, cigar-chomping era at 401 N. Wabash. Inter alia, I wrote Virginia Kay's obit the night she died.
A Daily News reporter in the late 1960s-early '70s named Jim Lewis was a wag whose amusements included latching onto note pads with colleagues' names printed at the bottom and then sending fake missives on these notes to other staffers.
Virginia Kay, in her inimitable dash-dot-fashion, dropped into her column one day: "Have you ever noticed that Jackie Kennedy has fat legs?" Jim Lewis took a Mike Royko note pad and typed on it: "Dear Virginia: Have you ever noticed that Cardinal Cody has a fat ass?" Having read the bogus note, Virginia stormed into Mike's cubicle. Oblivious to the contents, he stormed back at her. I believe they never again spoke to each other.
The mentions of Riccardo's and Roy Fisher bring to mind the wake for the Chicago Daily News at Riccardo's the night the paper closed in March 1978. Roy by then was dean of the University of Missouri's prestigious journalism school. Topped by a shock of silver-white hair, he was the very image of a distinguished academic.
As the evening and the drinking unfurled, a freshly laid-off Daily News reporter named Wade Nelson (now in Mayor Daley's employ) approached Roy and introduced himself.
"I'm an alumnus of your journalism school, Mr. Fisher, and I send $50 each year as a donation. I've always wondered what you do with that money," Wade said.
According to Wade, Roy replied, "Well, Wade, we just sort of piss it away."
You may remember me, Roger, as the Sun-Times Travel editor with a perch near your office circa 1982-1994. A whiff of Conrad Black and David Radler impelled me to give up that dream job for what has turned out to be 14 jolly years so far as Features editor at the Arkansas Democrat-Gazette in Little Rock.
Ebert: Forget Schnedler? Impossible.
It's hard to say just how Virginia Kay turned a three-dot column into an art form, but she did. I remember when a dear publicist named Mary Sweeney began complaining about her love life, and Virginia once referred to her as the Blessed Virgin Mary Sweeney.
Wonderful. As always, wonderful. I am a newsman and the son of a newsman, and at 31 I feel like a dinosaur looking up to watch the comet speeding in. I am part of the last generation, I think -- and there are precious few of us even in my generation -- who still feel that there is a great romance to the world of newspapers. I love the smell and feel of newsprint, the smell of the ink in the pressroom, even the noise of the presses -- although I now work at a paper that, like so many others, outsources its printing. I get a little sadder each time I read about one of these great old ladies failing. Thanks, Mr. Ebert, for reminding me in an uncertain time that even though that comet is heading toward impact, the ride was worth it.
Roger:
Tom Stites just dropped me an email with a link to this piece, in case I'd missed it. My thanks to him for putting me on to it, and to you for writing it. The intelligence of the many responses to it is a tribute to the power of your evocation of our salad days and, of course, a tribute to the responders themselves. Come to think of it, your dialogue with them is an example using the Internet at its best.
Ralph
Ebert: John McHugh wants to know: Are you still wearing that same pair of shoes?
Hi Roger. What a wonderfully written post. You have us going places and hearing things. I can hear the typewriters and ringing phones.
Makes me glad that I am of a generation that reads local newspapers, every day. And that I learned to type term papers on a manual typewriter - not by "keyboarding".
I wonder how many of us could tell a story as interesting about our careers. But then, many of us have careers and not vocations. Your advice to younger readers about finding a vocation is so vital.
I met my father-in-law, a newspaper man, almost 35 years ago. He was a publication manager at a small town daily. Hands on with the press plates and all of that. I watched him over the years as he worked hard to learn new technologies to keep his paper up to date.
I remember the day way back when he and I first discussed the newest thing going - the internet - and how it would affect newspapers. "Are you going to put your paper on the internet?", I asked him. He answered that he couldn't see how newspapers could make money online, and that they would foolishly put free content up just to have a presence online, and that it would kill the print editions eventually. He was quite prescient, I think.
Some of your commenters have noted that part of the thrill of being a newspaperman was knowing things before the rest of us. The irony, I think, is that this is not true anymore and it's what is killing print papers IMHO. When I do pick up the newspaper every night, I find myself skipping the "news" sections because I have already read those stories online, probably two days ago. I go to the editorial page because it's the only original content I find in the paper, apart from the obituaries. That's not enough, I fear, to hold my interest much further into the future.
Great post.
Ebert: Papers should beef up opinion, criticism, features, sports, arts, and develop distinctive writers. Forget about trying to be CNN.
Reading this post, what strikes me more than anything else is how much newspapers really used to contribute to the identity of a city. Columnists in particular, like Irv Kupcinet and Mike Royko in Chicago, or Herb Caen in San Francisco (those were writers in cities whose newspapers I’m familiar with- I’m sure they had counterparts in places across America) really personified the cities they lived in and wrote about. They were part of the shared “experience” of a city, giving each place a distinct personality. We’ve yet to see any new technology that replaces this role. Sure, people blog. But blogs seem to splinter more than they unify. That’s what is so strange about this new era we’re entering: everything seems like it’s becoming both more homogenized and (at least on a spiritual level) more fragmented at the same time
The profession seems jealously guarded to me, all the more so when you're unemployed and full of misspent talent. I recall reading an interview with Marlon Brando where he declares that the reason his "I coulda been a contender" speech is so powerful is because everyone feels this way.
Well, I coulda been a contender, too.
I am proud to be a student of communication and not of journalism alone. After life itself, communication is the great miracle of existence.
I wonder if this is one reason that "Citizen Kane" may have such an endearing place in the hearts of critics -- because it so effectively evokes that exciting aura of yesteryear's newspaper journalism? It was said of "Amadeus" and "Shakespeare in Love" that one reason the films were so well-loved by the Academy was because actors, producers and directors could so-well relate to the things that the central characters went through.
Here's a question that could be fodder for a follow-on post:
Do you think that being a news reporter first gave you a distinctive perspective / voice as a film reviewer? Do other reviewers have a similar background, or something different like film school?
Ebert: It helped. One formative experience was writing a weekly column in the U of I Daily Illini. Made me comfortable with the first person.
Dear Roger,
I loved your recollections. Being a recent refugee from one of the Tribune papers, I also wonder what will happen to a medium I enjoyed working in so much.
When I was in college in the 1980s, one of your former U of I colleagues, Dave Reed, was my mentor, and Mike Cordts was for a short time one of my teachers. They often told us stories of the fun years in Chicago journalism. My friends and I would visit Billy Goat's in hopes of seeing Royko at the bar, occasionally we did.
When I worked at the Daily Herald, I got a chance to know Bill Granger. He also told me great stories of being a reporter back in the 1970s and often made me jealous. Jack Mabley was also someone it was good to get to know.
Ironically, Jack, who knew some of the old Front Page guys early in his career, wrote a blog in his last year at the Daily Herald.
Thank you.
Ebert: Jack Mabley, a real sweetheart, was editor of The Daily Illini back in the 1930s, and would still attend reunions.
Once upon a time, I too was lured by newspapers' romance. As a kid I loved to read newspapers. I was a news junkie in the 1960s and 1970s, before the term was even thought of. With a friend I started a little rag called the "Carteret News." It ran for one issue in 1970. (No ads - it didn't even dawn on me to sell any.) I grew up reading the Star Ledger of Newark, the News-Tribune of Woodbridge, N.J. and the Asbury Park Press.
After a stint in the Navy and several attempts to attend college, I worked for 17 years as a fulltime stringer for several dailies in southern Pennsylvania. I covered everything from torch and pitchfork municipal or school board meetings (my favorite: where a school board argued for several hours over the most cost-effective size of trash cans) to goat drops and cow plops. Altogether, about 7,000 bylines. I even won a statewide award for my work. As the news holes got tighter I was squeezed out. In 2007 I started working for a weekly in a small Pennsylvania burg; that lasted a month when I was fired for refusing to plagiarize. Silly me.
I agree that papers should beef up opinion, criticism, features, sports, arts and develop distinctive writers. But - more importantly - they should also develop online content that covers local news and government like never before. Newspapers should be running towards blogs that do this, instead of cowering. Now they have the dream of all journalists, the bottomless news hole- they can literally be the record of what happens in small boroughs and townships and hold those in power accountable. Alas, they won't utilize that blessing.
As for myself, I am (FINALLY) in college now, with graduation hopefully approaching on May 2. But I will not be applying for newspaper work. Instead I hope to continue my own education so I might be able to teach others how to write. I firmly believe newspapers don't want anyone to work for them who thinks slightly out of the box and propose ways to save themselves. I unfortunately agree with Mr. Sosa's remark "Newspapers laden with corporate think had sown the seeds of their own demise."
God, I love newspapers. I wish I could be more optimistic.
But I can't.
By kerry of inframan on April 7, 2009 2:22 PM
I still remember what you wrote about Billy Bob Thornton and how you fantasized the manner in which he accepted the role by rolling up the script, putting it to his head and "pulling the trigger". One of the funniest things I ever read. You have had other moments....
I think one of the finest reviews (and the hallmark of an Ebert review) Ive read are the insights and observations written for My Neighbour Totoro. Intelligent and astute, infectious enthusiasm. The piece reads like sustained applause, wishing only illuminate the excellence found, for it to be understood on its own terms and thereby, hopefully, shared.
As a native of Boston, I am currently quaking in fear of the Boston Globe being unable to survive. Even if it makes it out of this mess, it probably will not live much longer. Newspapers are being taken away by the internet and the digital distribution of information. While the camaraderie of the newsroom may be lost forever, the thing we should really fear is the absence of a business whose entire purpose is to find the truth, and spread it to the community, whether that community is a small town or a major city. What I really want to see is newspapers that are unable to continue as a "paper", figure out a way to continue to exist, simply putting out their message, their reporting, through a website or maybe some other method of distribution, rather than simply folding and leaving an informational vacuum. I will miss being able to pick up a paper and leaf through it, but if nothing is done, I will miss being able to get the information the newspapers provided more.
What a fantastic story. That's really living, isn't it? You can almost taste the beer and smell the newsroom and feel the electricity in the atmosphere.
I've been - I was - a reporter for many years. I'm still in a state of denial that I no longer get to go to work after being laid off in January. That's one of the funny things about being a reporter, if you've always wanted to be one. You don't have to go to work, you get to go.
Almost everything has changed since Roger's early days, like how black and white became living colour, and pies cooling on the windowsill became frozen from the grocery store. Life has changed and that's okay. It'll do that. But what hasn't changed is the common reporter. Cynical, sarcastic, and funny as hell in most cases, they possess a grudging devotion to duty not seen in other vocations.
True, Woodward and Bernstein inadvertently changed the landscape and gave birth to the "super reporter" who got into the game to make a name for himself. They then spawned the talking heads of CNN and Fox News, among many, but the GA or beat reporter at the daily hasn't changed much over the years.
One reporter I like very much had the difficult task of calling the family of a young man who had died in an auto accident only hours earlier. She was excited to do it and for the life of me I couldn't figure out why.
"You really like calling families at times like this?" I asked.
"No, I hate it. But I LOVE trying to find them."
She loved the chase, as did I. Joe Louis, I think, had a saying I borrowed on many occasions. "You can run, but you can't hide." If I needed to speak with someone concerning a story I was working on, God help them if they tried to dodge me. The chase would be on and I would never be the first one to tire of it.
Those days seem to be over now. I'm 46 and they're still laying people off and shutting down papers, some of them institutions.
Thanks, Roger, for this beautifully written story. You're a master story teller.
As always, roger, a wonderful read.
When I departed journalism after 20-some years I knew I was leaving behind one of the most interesting jobs – and many of the most interesting and compassionate people – I would ever experience in the workplace. Unfortunately, I would also be leaving an industry that routinely rewarded it's publishers and advertising staffs with bonuses and all-expense-paid vacations, while leaving its crew of reporters, photographers and editors to fend for themselves.
This is the other side to the romantic notion of The Newsroom, and it's worth mentioning. For instance, when my own team received a Pulitzer nomination in 1992 (we lost, ultimately) none of us received a dime in the way of a cash bonus, or so even much as a kind note of acknowledgment from our ME. Not that the nomination itself wasn't an honor, mind you, but...
Even so, truth be told, if I had to do over again I still might spend a while chasing The News, but this time it would be with the full knowledge that it was an indulgent lark, and not to be confused with a paying career that could afford you a nice piece of vacation property, not to mention the tuition for a son or daughter for an ivy league school.
Your mother was right, and she's also fortunate her son was one-in-a-million.
So are we, by the way. -g
Ebert: Conrad Black so enriched himself from his papers (homes in Palm Beach, London, New York, Toronto, butlers, parties or famous friends, private jets)--why, you'd think he was an English lord.
When Murdoch bought the Sun-Times, I was asked how I could still work there. My reply: "It's not his paper. It's my paper. He only owns it."
Ron Barth:
I will retract my previous statement denouncing you as crazy as an outhouse rat if you will go on record here. I'll apologize, too. Do you honestly believe Bush had anything to do with 9/11?
I think the Bush Administration was a nightmare. I've written before that I felt Bush was an abject failure, the worst President since maybe Franklin Pierce, but this doesn't mean he orchestrated 9/11. (Hell, it worked. This should be enough evidence for anyone to realize Bush had nothing to do with it.)
David
but somebody must be to blame for all this change.
Change is. No blame. What has been may seem better than what is or will be - but now is always the past for someone who comes later.
My point is that yesterday usually looks pretty interesting to those of us who didn't live it. And yes, sometimes yesterday was pretty damn cool. My dad used to talk about his pet crow who would follow him to school and make guerilla raids on kids' pencils by flying in and out of the open windows. Could have quite a collection by the end of the day (carefully stashed back in dad's bedroom). Can you imagine any such thing happening now - in today's hermetically-sealed buildings with today's germophobic parents?
My point is that today's newsgatherers - wherever they are - will have stories that sound pretty interesting to the younger generation to be. Maybe about how everyone still used keyboards (how quaint!) and screens (what's that?) and some telephones (huh?) still had cords (talk about being tied to one place!).
The first computers in newsrooms (and I was there for that) introduced boxes to newsrooms. No more looking up from the typewriter and seeing the world - the box was there instead. Cubicles were just a bigger box to hold the smaller box.
No blame. One thing leads to another...and eventually, one thing ends up in the history books. That said, I always wanted a crow when I was a kid.
Ebert: The waft of summer air through the window was a blessing.
Mr. Ebert:
Thanks very much for your post, which brought back a lot of memories from my own newspaper days (1971-2007).
Regarding movies about newspapers: One of my favorites is "Deadline USA," with Humphrey Bogart, which unfortunately doesn't seem to be on DVD.
"Deadline USA" is particularly poignant these days because of one scene that takes place at a bar, at a "wake" for a newspaper that's about to go out of business.
Best wishes,
Mark M.
Just saw this now at the office. Sadly, no computer at my flat.
Snark! And a good 'un, too!
And therein lies the root of the "liberal media" canard parroted by the likes of Stanley Dancer above. Guess what, Stanley, reporters don't set editorial policy; billionaires do. The same applies to the broadcast and cable nets.
Ebert: Actually, there were probably a few reporters who voted for Bush, although none have come forward...
Anyone who has covered public figures can sense a faker. Bush should have been disqualified after the first debate.
Memory fails me; was that the one in which he was probably wired (with electronics, not his "youthful" [into his 30's] cocaine use)? Yet another example of a significant story -- Why would a man seeking the office of the US presidency need to be coached? Is he too damn stupid/uneducated/uninformed to come up with coherent responses/statements extemporaneously? -- ignored by the "liberal" MSM until pressed by online sources/blogs.
Ebert: Why? Because the man was clueless as a turnip, and coached by evildoers.
Roger,
I enjoyed your anti-O'Reilly editorializing (particularly the Squeaky joke) but I'm concerned about the possible consequences- why may prove somewhat inconvenient for you.
If you're not already aware of this, I strongly suspect that this will put you, quite visibly, on O'Reilly's "stalk" list. A number of previous reporters, writers, commentators who have made vaguely anti-Bill comments have found themselves on the receiving end of an ambush "interview" and pelted with "when did you stop beating your wife" type questions.
Here's a few cautionary tales:
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2009/03/24/oreilly-producer-stalks-a_n_178468.html
http://thinkprogress.org/2009/03/23/watters-ambush/
http://thinkprogress.org/2009/04/01/jenkins-professor-ambush/
Be prepared. Satirist, comic-strip author Dan Perkins (A.K.A. Tom Tomorrow) , suggests (Via. Keith Olberman) victims of an ambush pepper their answers, as often as possible, with the words "Loofah," "Andrea Mackris," and "Falafel" as much as possible. If every sentence that comes out of your talking device has one of those three words, there's no way the video they shoot will go on the air.
Good luck.
Ebert: No need to ambush me. Ever since I have lost the ability to speak, I have become his ideal guest.
Oh, and perhaps now might be the time to begin carrying around a charged video Camera so that you might tape any "interview" that takes place for yourself. You, as a film critic, should be well aware of what the editing room can do.
Ebert: I have a neat little Flip.
Roger, thank you for a beautiful post and the great stories. I feel so nostalgic reading it, perhaps mourning the loss of the true newspaperman and woman....the good old time reporter, vs today's "journalist". My siblings and I have been voracious, devoted readers, learning the habit from our parents. I have fond memories of we 3 kids under ten, pouring over the Saturday papers. Our family rule, no section could be thrown out until every member had a chance to read it. We had piles of papers everywhere! This rule and ritual has continued into our adult lives. Over the past few years I've slowly cancelled all my subscriptions, the newspaper is simply letting me down. I read online now, sifting through all the news (& dreck) at my fingertips, but I really miss holding that paper and reading those tough investigative stories. Would a Woodward and Bernstein get the same support from their editors today? Did you have a chance to read Jeff Jarvis' post, "To newspaper moguls: You Blew It"? He's absolutely right.
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/jeff-jarvis/to-newspaper-moguls-you-b_b_184309.html
And a few more helpful links for dealing with the probable ambush you are likely to experience:
http://crooksandliars.com/john-amato/bill-oreillys-ambush-journalism-87-seco
http://crooksandliars.com/2008/06/13/the-complete-guide-on-how-to-deal-with-bill-oreillys-ambush-producers
Like the boy scouts, and Tom Lehrer, say, "Be Prepared!"
I started as an "editorial assistant" (copy boy) at the Asbury Park Press in 1979.(I had a yellow VW Rabbitt which probably still smells of clam sauce from fetching dinner for the copy desk.) The paper had just switched from hot type, i.e. lead, to "cold" or computer-generated type. Newsroom geeks were beginning to warn about the advent of the PC and how, in 25 years, everybody would be reading their news on-line - even if no one had ever yet used the term. Well, it's 30 years now and dammed if they weren't about right.
I had a similar beer breakfast once with a guy who worked for the revered and already gone New Evening News. He was at smaller paper by then, and I was there to interview for an editor's job. The paper was a PMer so, after putting it to bed about 11:30 am, he invited me out for a beer at the local reporter's hangout. (Has there ever been a newspaper in history without one?)"Kid," I swear he said,"Why the hell would you want to work at this rag?"
Dear Mr. Ebert,
My father was telegraph editor and then a copy editor for the Chicago Daily News until it folded. Then he worked for the Chicago Tribune for a few months. Then he got sick and died. I went to the University of Illinois in Urbana and was a sophomore when I decided to go into newspaper journalism; the Daily News still had a year or so left. When I told him what I planned to do he said, "I hoped you'd get into something more lucrative, like sticking up gas stations."
I laughed, and kept working at The Daily Illini (where I smoked at my desk) and then, like you, at The Champaign-Urbana News-Gazette (where I smoked at my desk) and then at a banking newspaper in New York and, for the past 19 years, at The Ann Arbor News – which the Newhouses will fold in July.
As far as I know we're the only one-newspaper town in the country that will soon be a no-newspaper town. As far as I can tell, the reason why is that the Ann Arbor market is the best game the company has for its Hail Mary of a new online operation. I got lucky with a buyout offer made four months before the announcment that we're foldinge, so I'll be in better shape come July than most of my colleagues here.
After 30 years of copy editing, it is so painful to come to grips with the fact that nobody thinks that work is worth money anymore. Should I have listened to Dad and held up gas stations? My sister reminds me that gas stations never have much cash because everybody uses plastic, so that's another perfectly good business model shot to hell. (And Newhouse had fantastic benefits.)
I've been numb and depressed and, mostly, pissed. But I didn't cry until I read your blog and I'm not sure I want to thank you for that.
Domenica Trevor
Ebert: One of the best university towns in the world won't have a paper? How is the Michigan Daily doing?
Ron Barth Jr. wrote:
"PS If you're going to cyberstalk me, "Private" Dancer, get it right. What I wrote in my review of The New Pearl Harbor was that "the contextual analyses of the 9/11 timeline...argue strongly for Bush administration complicity in the attacks." Unlike Repugs, I don't "believe" in anything, any ideology, without, ya know, actual empirical or hard logical evidence."
I discovered your review by typing in "Ron Barth Jr." at Google and hitting "Enter". To you, this is "cyberstalking". I had a theory, based on your obsessive and repetitive posts on this blog, that you had no life or wife to keep you busy, and that I might find examples of your writing that would discredit you. I was nevertheless amazed at the goldmine of lunacy that I uncovered.
I have linked to your review previously, but I will quote the ENTIRE review below, and let other readers judge for themselves whether or not you are a 9/11 "Truther".
"This book should be essential reading to anyone interested in understanding the events of 9/11/01. Its value is to be found in the questions it raises regarding government conduct in relation to the terrorist attacks. While the author admits that much of the information is drawn from other sources, it is no less important for that fact. What I found most interesting were the contextual analyses of the 9/11 timeline that argue strongly for Bush administration complicity in the attacks. On 9/11, when I first heard of the attacks, the first historical analogy that came to mind was the German Reichstag fire, and how that "terrorist" act, later shown to be staged by the Nazi authorities, led to the passage of the Enabling Act and Hitler's ascent to dictatorial power. I have seen nothing in Bush's 9/11 conduct, from pushing the Patriot Act to waging aggressive war, that has persuaded me that any analogy other than this is more appropriate."
He believes so strongly in this Hitler analogy (how original) that his username at Democratic Underground is "reichstag911". Here is a link where Mr. Barth Jr. reiterates his belief in the Bush administration's complicity in 9/11.
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=132x2764095#2764095
Perhaps Ron can enlighten us all as to why the crashing planes were insufficient to bring down the towers. Did Bush plant the explosives himself, or did he let Dick Cheney do his dirty work again?
In another testament to his disordered mind, he responds to a thread where another Democratic poster is lamenting Sandra Day O'Connor's decision to step down as a Supreme Court Justice to take care of her husband, who suffers from dementia. Her husband subsequently started a "romance" with another patient in his nursing home:
Baby Snooks: "She not only lost the husband she wanted to take care of and be with in his final days to someone else, we lost a Supreme Court justice who might have stood her ground in defense of the Constitution. Certainly we could have done without her replacement. That must bear on her as well."
Ron Barth Jr. (AKA Raving Madman): "Not so fast with the plaudits for poor Sandy. "(W)e lost a Supreme Court justice who might have stood her ground in defense of the Constitution?" She had her chance to defend the Constitution in Bush v. Gore, and passed. Fuck her and the AD-afflicted horse's ass (Reagan) she rode in on. While her replacement is almost certainly worse than she, it does not augur well for us Americans that we are praising the lesser of these authoritarian right-wing evils."
Link: http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=102&topic_id=3064587&mesg_id=3064725
Apparently Sandra Day O'Connor is an authoritarian right-wing evil. I had no idea, but you can learn a lot from Mr. Barth Jr. Including civility and compassion.
Ron, you would give your fellow liberals a bad name were it not for the fact that you are demonstrably insane.
Ebert: Now, now.
"Ebert: Why? Because the man was clueless as a turnip, and coached by evildoers."
Hmmm...indeed, however much better turnips can make one's dinner, doesn't make it wise to vote for one.
Not unlike W.
Ron Barth Jr. wrote:
"And therein lies the root of the "liberal media" canard parroted by the likes of Stanley Dancer above. Guess what, Stanley, reporters don't set editorial policy; billionaires do. The same applies to the broadcast and cable nets."
Ebert: Actually, there were probably a few reporters who voted for Bush, although none have come forward...
I guess it depends upon the billionaire, doesn't it? Some may be hands-on, like Rupert Murdoch, or on the liberal side, Arthur Sulzberger of the New York Times. Some owners probably don't care what reporters do as long as the money rolls in. The following quotes are from the overview of "Coloring the News" by William McGowan.
Link: http://www.amazon.com/Coloring-News-Political-Correctness-Journalism/dp/1893554600/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1239218245&sr=1-1
You can read the Overview for free. Click on "Search inside this book".
"To increase the racial and ethnic diversity of their staffs, almost every major news organization has mounted a "pluralism plan" with aggressive hiring and promotion goals, and created a special "diversity steering committee" to oversee it--the "Diversity or Die" committee, as Sulzberger jokingly called his organization's task force in his Diversity Summit speech. In some places, such as the New York Times, The Los Angeles Times, and The Philadelphia Inquirer, top editors have openly admitted to relying on quotas, favoring less qualified minority candidates in filling positions, and violating hiring freezes when minority journalists have been in short supply."
Could these policies have led to the Jason Blair fiasco? In my opinion, yes.
"In 1999, for instance, the style manual used at the New York Times counseled that reporters and editors avoid using "voodoo" as a term of disparagement, since "voodoo is a religion with many followers" who might get upset at hints that it might involve "irrational beliefs"."
Later in the book, McGowan discusses how Gannett corporation, publishers of USA Today and many local papers, sent out a company-wide directive specifying that a certain percentage of minorities must appear in the newspapers' photographs. The editors at one affiliate, The Burlington Free Press of Vermont, mandated that at least one of every six faces in an ongoing photo feature be that of a minority. The newspaper's leading columnist was instructed to ensure that "at least one column in every four should be about a minority or address a diversity issue". The photographers met the quota by publishing the same few minorities over and over again (due to demographics, this was the only way to fulfill the mandate). Later, a reporter was told to kill a story critical of some members of the minority population (the reporter had attended a meeting and recorded racial slurs made by a minority speaker). The reporter refused and was fired.
Here is a link from the NYTimes discussing Gannett's diversity efforts:
http://www.nytimes.com/1988/11/27/us/gannett-stressing-minority-groups.html
Roger, you have estimated that the majority of your fellow reporters at the Sun Times lean liberal. Do you think that this has no impact on their reporting of wedge issues? Are they truly "fair and balanced"? For the record, Fox News obviously leans right, but their clever slogan drives liberals crazy, because it makes a mockery of the whole concept of "objective reporting".
Also for the record, I don't want newspapers to practice affirmative action for conservatives by hiring a few tokens (e.g. David Brooks). I do think that overwhelmingly liberal news staffs tend to foster "group think". I would bet that if a reporter at the Sun-Times admitted to voting for Bush, it would adversely affect his career. Most reporters are liberal not because of a conspiracy, but because liberals are more likely to choose journalism as their profession, just as "law and order" types gravitate toward police work and the military. Newspapers should simply be honest about their biases.
Ebert: Stanley, how can I put this? The majority of intelligent people in this country are liberal.
Roger, Thank you for sharing your wonderful memories with us. Keep 'em coming.
The video of the press reminded me that one of my own favorite memories of living in Chicago was a late night tour of the Sun Times printing press (circa 1980). I'm a little foggy on how I got there, but I think three other secretaries from my office and I had been out drinking and we must have met someone who worked there. (Hey, girls, you wanna see my printing press? I don't know. Maybe.) Anyway, he took us inside the workings of the press, not just on the outside of the glass. I was enthralled. And drunk. And high from the smells. I didn't want to leave.
So, what was the City room like when you found out you won the Pulitzer? Did you have any advance inkling that would happen, and how did you find out?
Ebert: I wish I had Hugh Hough here to tell you how I felt.
Uh-oh, I'm hurt by Stanley's slings and arrows. Tell ya what, Roger, let's put it to a vote of our regular readers rather than the voice of experience and expertise himself, Stanley Dancer:
Is Ron Barth, Jr., based on what he's written here and elsewhere, demonstrably insane?
PS Stanley, you didn't present any facts refuting what I first wrote in reply to your opinion-laden post about scrounging free news from your sworn enemies and other miscellanea.
Ebert: Let's start a one-on-one flame war...
Made me comfortable with the first person.
That is difficult.
Ebert: Actually, there were probably a few reporters who voted for Bush, although none have come forward... Anyone who has covered public figures can sense a faker. Bush should have been disqualified after the first debate.
Yes, I see your point, Roger. I have often perceived you Americans to be unabashedly frank. Still, it is indeed wise to keep squabbles out of places of work. Afterwork pubs seem more likely the place where these arguments could take place; and where people of the same political creed could also banter against each other.
I got laid off a month ago as a copy editor for the local newspaper; I'd been working there 16 years. I'm seriously considering taking a part-time job working on the paper's website, in large part because it would get me back into the newsroom, working breaking news. Which is by way of saying about your post: Yes, precisely.
By the time I got into newspapers, the newsroom drinking was long gone, and the smoking limited to a porch off the break room (the first place to go looking for my then-boss if you didn't see her in the newsroom). But there were stories... apparently one of the reasons the newsroom had many of its windows removed in the Great Remodeling was the number of beer cans that were showing up on the roof of the building next door...
My third week on the job I came into work to find newsroom TVs replaying video of the Branch Davidian compound fire. That was my first experience with an extra edition -- and the next to last one we ever put out. (The last was for the OJ verdict. There stopped being much point, even before we had a website to update between print editions.)
I was there in the newsroom when Princess Diana died; I was the only one there, putting the paper to bed, when a pressman told me his wife had called about a bomb at the Atlanta Olympics (I thought he was joking, but I checked the wire just to be sure. The next thing that happened was the slot for the night getting told as he walked into the bar to turn around and go back to work). Fires, war, elections... one of my two personal "Dewey Defeats Truman" moments was rushing home from finishing up the "Bush wins" front, hoping to be in time to catch Gore's concession -- only to find out there wouldn't be one, too late to change the front page. (The other one was a front-page headline proclaiming that New Orleans had been largely spared. It was only when I got home that word started getting out about the levee breaks...)
It was only 16 years, but that was enough for two seismic shifts: the switch from pasteup and darkrooms to everything taking place on a Macintosh screen, spelling the doom of the backshop; and now this. The future is online, though damned if I know what the business model is going to be. Maybe there will still be newsrooms, maybe not. If there aren't... well, it'll be a pity.
Gadget Boy Grinds Gear
Zach Brutsche
My dear sir,
I write this having read your post, and all subsequent comments, with my latest electronic toy, an iPod touch. I also wrote you a lengthy reply on said iPod, but foolishly tried to find a source from another page, and subsequently lost everything that I thumbed out. Viva technology, and learning limits! So, apologies, this is my second draft on the slightly more reliable laptop.
The whizbanging gadgets have a few advantages over hardcopy, this is true. I can access music, internet, video... I spent a good deal of time thumbing a reply to your (once again, seemingly always)evocative memories. I'm mostly a thumbs-up kind of guy, but that method anatomically forces me to give a constant, inconveniently-trademarked negative review. Hardcopy has several advantages, as well.
With a newspaper, I do not need to keep a weather eye on the battery meter. Nor am I slave to a WiFi or cellular signal. I don't have to turn off a newspaper in an airplane, nor plug in uncomfortable earphones or set it to "vibrate." If I want a newspaper, it only costs me $.50-$1.00, not up to $500.
My iPod can make noises, sure, and I'm obviously going to hold it. But it doesn't involve my visual, audible and olfactory senses in the same way as a newspaper. Likewise, it is not immediately recyclable/reusable/replaceable. With my doohickey, I cannot: swat a fly; stuff a holey shoe; make impromptu shinguards for a pickup soccer game; teach a kid to make a hat/boat/boat-hat; wrap a fish/fish and chips; snap open and fold in half, quarters, eighths, etc.; wrap a last-minute present/dishes and other valuables for a move; use as an impromptu bumbershoot in case of inclement weather; drain fried foods onto; line a hamster/cockatoo/some other cute and fuzzy/feathery critter's habitat; start a fire; make papier mache; peel out the funnies; look over at someone meaningfully; so much more...
This is a fairly long list, to which many would be able to add. And, like books and vinyl albums, I don't think that we'll ever grow out of them. Still, they must adapt, or fear the reaper. There will always be reporters, those intrepid personalities who will, with dogged tenacity, wheedling, bargaining, and bullshitting, by any means, get the true story out to the deserving public, whether they are appreciated or not. And we'll still queue up to read it, gather around the modern and future equivalent of the "EXTRY! EXTRY! READ ALL ABOUT IT!" boys on street corners, shilling their rag. Because we, too, want to be the first to know after those in the know...
So, come autumn, when you've started your illicit neighborhood hand-raked leaf burn on the street (no leaf-blowers allowed!), teach a child how to make a newspaper sailboat! Clip out an article that grabs your attention, and paste it in a scrapbook! Go buy a fresh cod and some potatoes, fry 'em up, and wrap it in yesterday's news! The ink is mainly soy based, now. Soy's a veggie, so it's good for ya!
Hildy Johnson: [speaking to Walter on the phone] "Did you hear that? That's the story I just wrote. Yes, yes, I know we had a bargain. I just said I'd write it, I didn't say I wouldn't tear it up! It's all in little pieces now, Walter, and I hope to do the same for you some day!"
[hangs up emphatically]
Hildy Johnson: [to the other reporters] "And that, my friends, is my farewell to the newspaper game."
-30-
For Ron and Stanley:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BFEvItNyUaM
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=K-MEkwooP2U
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=E_pGo3aVQV0
Roger is not Mills Lane, much as we'd like him to be.
Com’on Ebert, the real ques. Is whether Doris Day really got weak in the knees even thou it was just a movie, she with her tight skirts and me with my pubescence, frankly I think she did. Would that most men nowindays had that kind of effect on women. It could happen regardless of the profession. I worked for an insurance company, on a floor with a sea of desks like a news room, there were guys there that had it. My brother-in-law was a fireman. He oozed it. Gable did, John Kennedy did, it can be controlled, but it’s still there. I think you have it.
Ebert: Women would flatten me in the stampede to get to JFK.
If they had held a vote freshman year of journalism school, I probably would have won the "Most likely to ditch Medill to become a Metra conductor" award. I waded through the classes half-heartedly as everything I loved about writing was beaten out of me and replaced with method and technique and jargon.
Then I went on an internship and walked into a newsroom for the first time. About two months later, as I started my rotation on the copy desk, I felt the press rumble to life late that night and held a fresh-off-the-press copy in my hands minutes later. It was like holding a newborn.
Come Friday, as I clean out my desk at a business magazine that just couldn't afford to keep me any longer, I'll go home and return to the search for what I swear will be my first job out of the field in 13 years. A friend of mine, who has already made the leap, now regrets it
"We could have stayed forever," he told me one night.
If only.
I try not to attack another person's position in a debate, but instead rather try to let its own ideas add to the architecture of the subject matter by influx as opposed to an adversarial opposition that tends to become over-exagerrated to the point where at from a distance it seems to wall off the permeative wall of ideas.
In other words, if you spend the majority of your response attacking somebody's view in exaggeration you do it at the expense of losing the heart of the discussion.
I originally wanted to write about how "conservatives" are commenting about how Obama bowed to the Saudi king. And how Saudi's get their power by oil. And how Obama has an energy policy to take the world in an alcohol car direction by mandating all cars sold here be flex-fueled by 2012, affecting the global industry. And how the Bush's flew the Bin Laden's out of the country after 9/11. And how the Iraq war itself was perhaps done because the Saudis were controlling Washington and Saddam Hussein was their biggest threat, not to mention that Spencer Abraham, who gave us the false promise of hydrogen cars is now a paid agent to the Saudi government through the United Arab Emirates.
Venting Accomplished.
Yes, it's sad that newspapers may be on the way out, but they really have only themselves to blame. I don't know if newspapers have always been this bad, or if I'm just better able to recognize it the older I get (I had a recent correspondence with Vancouver Sun editor Stephen Hume on the question of newspapers' value, and he said "There never was a 'golden age."). All I know is that I can hardly stand reading them anymore.
For fun, let's look at the contents of a typical newspaper, and see what's worth keeping.
First, take out anything that the Internet actually does do a lot better. Let's be honest -- that covers pretty much everything after the first two sections: classified ads, advice columns, movie reviews, comics, travelogues, stock quotes, gossip. The Op-Ed page can go too; the Internet is just full of opinionated blowhards, and a lot of them write just as well as the professionals do (and ask more interesting questions).
We can also drop the stories which are basically just press-releases. Nowadays, any group that wants information put out there can just put it on their website.
Now let's lose the stuff of questionable ethical content. I'm talking about the 'news' that gives you a vaguely uncomfortable feeling about what society is coming to, and makes you wonder if the media has itself become one of the institutions we need protection from. Lurid crimes from half a continent away, inflammatory fear-mongering wrapped in a mantle of educating the public, and just generally anything that makes you wonder "Does this really elevate the public discourse?"
Next, let's forget about newspapers' role in holding our public figures to the fire and keeping them honest, because...shucks, TV is just so much better at it. Ditto for 'human interest,' come to think of it.
And finally, throw out the detailed informative stories involving intensive research and analysis. If that's what I want, and I'm saying this with sincerity and not as a glib punchline, I'll go to a bookstore.
What's left is hardly enough to line a birdcage with.
All that being said, Roger, would you have any advice for a young snarky writer who'd like to break into newspaper work? ;)
Just out of curiosity, do you happen to remember what the very first movie you reviewed was?
And, sticking on topic here, I am very adamantly against newspapers going by the wayside in this world. I start my morning every day with a hearty breakfast, a cup of coffee, and a newspaper and I cant imagine that changing. Nor do I even want to. Sure, I suppose I could move my breakfast to my computer desk and read the news on my computer, but its just wouldn't be the same.
Ebert: "Galia," from 1967:
http://rogerebert.suntimes.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/19670407/REVIEWS/704070301/1023
My father, Dave Bowring, got his start writing for the Dayton Daily News, but his dream (that he eventually realized) was to be an outdoors writer. (Incidentally, a professor of his in college, upon hearing my dad's plan to be an outdoors writer, cracked "You mean you want to take your typewriter outside?") He ended his career at Sports Afield magazine, doing what he loved, and along the way he wrote a few books about hunting and fishing. I've become more of a writer than I planned to be, and I hope there's a little of my dad's skill in what I do, although I don't work for a newspaper. Friends of mine in the newspaper business are losing their jobs right and left, sad to see this sea change to the industry. Thank you for this wonderful piece about your experiences. I wish my dad were here today, he would have enjoyed reading it, too--and I could have asked him if it rang true for him! Cheers.
Man, I would love it if Bill O'Reilly would list me as a Pinhead. The Van Dyke Revue could really use the publicity.
I call conservatives on the facts all the time, so I'm calling Ron on this one:
Ron: You can put an end to this by answering Stanley specifically. Write something like,
"I believe the Bush Administration did not orchestrate nor have anything to do with the attacks of September 11, 2001."
If you are unable to do this, then get off my side, man.
There isn't a shred of evidence that the Bush Administration orchestrated 911. Do you honestly believe the man who gave an unwanted back-rub to Angela Merkel at the G8 summit had the foresight to plan something like this? My word, I knew enough not to do something like that in high school! Bush was an ill-prepared, anti-intellectual, easily manipulated jabbering dupe. You can stick to the facts to make your case that Bush was a terrible President.
This brought back memories. I was a copyboy at the Sun Times in the late summer and early fall of 1966 and remember most of the people you speak of. The guys in the press room used to call me Milton Jr. or ask if I was Milton's brother because I also had a mustache, even if it was somewhat minor compared to Milton's. I am pretty sure we must have missed each other as I would have recognized your name. You were the editor of the Daily Illini when I was a freshman at the U of I and I certainly knew your name when I first saw it in the newspaper.
It was a great experience, short though it was, and I thank you for taking me back. See you at Ebertfest.
It is a different world for certain. I write a review/entertainment column, but I am one of the few local columnists. Wire stories dominate so much of the space now. The times that I have been to the newsroom, it is more eerily quiet than anything else. It's difficult for an industry that didn't fully anticipate the impact of the new media to try to play catch up, and for many papers that has been an impossible task. I fear for the day when I can no longer hold a physical paper in my hands, but I believe it is coming. I also believe that that day will be accompanied by regret.
Ive just realized the flame war is just the online version of what goes on in bars where people are burning off stress and the drinks are flowing. of course a debate over the who`s and why`s and wherefor`s of the sept 11,2001 attacks! the louder the better!
Roger,
I believe that the quest to do something you love with your career is as profound a pursuit as maintaining free will in a world that seems fated to preconceived conclusions... I really enjoy
"Metropolos" where two young men attempting to figure out the world talk to a man that seems to
indicate themselves in 10 years, who considers himself a failure. Through expertly timed upper
class language he contemplates what he has become. He considers himself to have failed because
simply he feels he is unable to answer the question "what do you do?" with any comfort...
Though I do enjoy what I do, I also am attempting to break into the newspaper market. I have
contacted several publications in multiple cities with a response range of ignoring to red hot
slamming of my material. I'm submitting pieces on movies weekly to a roundtable of local
publications currently.
REALLY liked the good ol' days newspaper post.
Now to what I hope will be the last words I write about W. My shrink has been in practice over 30 years. One (always short) session ago, we were discussing the disaster known as W. My guy said it was obvious to him that W. was severely ADD. And that Bush could not read a long sentence without forgetting what the first words were. This explains the electronic aids. And much else.
I just read your "Galia" review. It's nice to see that the snark was there from the get-go.
Reply to: Ebert: Conrad Black so enriched himself from his papers (homes in Palm Beach, London, New York, Toronto, butlers, parties or famous friends, private jets)--why, you'd think he was an English lord.
Is that enough of a premise for a great movie?
Many people claim "Raiders" was the greatest movie, the movie experience that changed their lives forever.
Here's some advice from the top-grossing screenwriter about creating characters that the audience will remember: I worry that my characters are too timid, or bland; too much a reflection of myself, meaning my actual self, and not enough a reflection of my hidden self, my fears, experiences, dreams, wishful thinking, intuition, hang-ups and psychosis. I worry that my characters are not compelling or unique enough in an external-to-myself sense, as in, the world's greatest detective (Sherlock Holmes) or a British agent with a license to kill or a man who lives 2000 years (Lazarus Long); etc.
Does that describe Conrad Black? Indiana Jones?
"Raiders of the Lost Ark" took place in 1936. In one sense, Indy was our father, or maybe our grandfather, who went off to work every day. Boys dreamed about their fathers getting on a plane, taking off their suit and replacing it with a leather jacket, and having great adventures. Indiana Jones, literally, came from adventure stories that a young George Lucas used to make up about his family dog, named Indiana.
More advice: My goal is from page one is to present the story as a series of 'characters in situations' where the information and issues appear as a side effect of people dealing with immediate problems, with no relief.
People dealing with immediate problems? Did Conrad Black have a cash flow problem? Was he trying to maintain a lifestyle that he couldn't actually afford?
"The Dark Knight" used an interesting technique of allowing the audience to make a moral decision along with the hero.
My thought is, a Chicago newspaper is in trouble. And there's a ticking clock. Once the newspaper disappears, it will never return. The hero wants to organize an employee buy-out, but first they have to convince themselves that the paper will generate enough income. The hero is asked to buy a Lotto ticket, and then told that the ticket will provide him with a jackpot of $200 million on the condition that he uses it to buy the newspaper.
This is my impression of Chicago. Everything is fixed. The elections are fixed. The court cases are fixed. Richard Gere played a crooked lawyer in "Chicago" because that's what the name represents. If a movie says the Lotto in Illinois is fixed, no one would give it a second thought.
For decades, people in Chicago have been winning Lotto jackpots and using the money to buy palatial homes in Santa Barbara, where the state of Illinois gets absolutely no benefit. The men who run the Lotto decide, "Let's give the money to people who deserve it. Let's give the money to people who will stay in Chicago and use the money to build our economy."
Here in California, half of the SuperLotto money is supposed to go to the school system. Even the Governor borrows from the Lotto fund to pay for other government services, and the students lose when school programs are cut and teachers are laid off.
The Bad Guys want our hero to win the jackpot, buy the newspaper, and swear, "I know the Lotto is not fixed because I won a huge jackpot and my hands are clean." Of course, his hands aren't clean. He would be lying. They want him to lie. They want the public to be fooled while they stuff the money in their own pockets. and now, they want to own a newspaper.
I'm wondering, what would a newspaper man do? Would this pose a moral dilemma?
Reply to: Ebert: Papers should beef up opinion, criticism, features, sports, arts, and develop distinctive writers. Forget about trying to be CNN.
If you live in Chicago, and the price of winning a crooked jackpot and saving the newspaper is to lie about your own honesty, to swear up and down that everything is honest... what would you do? If the paper is about to fold because a Conrad Black left it with $400 million in assets and $800 million in debt?
Reply to: Ebert: The news business was slow to wake up. Apart from Bush's policies, why couldn't they see that Bush was just plain too stupid, uneducated and inarticulate to be President?
Bush was a way for Republicans to regain control of the White House. To get rid of Democrats like Carter and Clinton. They didn't care who Bush was, as long as he was the son and heir of a former Republican President. The Republicans were so desperate to get the White House back, they would have nominated an actor with no political qualifications other than being able to read a speech well off a teleprompter... in fiction, of course.
Ebert:"The majority of intelligent people in this country are liberal." /*/*/ Ho-o-okay... does that mean (a) in order to be considered intelligent, one must be liberal (politcally, socially, spiritually, or whatever); or (b) if one is conservative (politically, socially, spiritually, or whatever), than one is less intelligent? And where does that leave me, since I don't consider myself to be either? /*/*/ I grew up in the 50s and 60s, in a house where my parents voted for Democrats only. My father, a lifelong union man, always said he would never vote for a Republican, because the GOP was anti-labor. Dad was far from liberal in the currently understood sense; he just didn't care for the far right. The last presidential candidate he supported with any kind of enthusiasm was Hubert Humphrey in '68. He lived through six subsequent presidential campaigns, and I always suspected that he skipped the presidential slot on most of them, due to the Democrats' hard left turn in '72. (He was what came to be called a "Reagan Democrat" but I don't think he ever went so far as to actually vote that way.) My brother had a brief flirtation with conservatism (from reading John Campbell's editorials in ANALOG), but the Vietnam war sent him leftward; he was "clean for Gene" McCarthy in '68, which meant he was not only down on LBJ and Humphrey, but also on Bobby Kennedy, who was regarded by the McCarthyans as an opportunist, using McC as a stalking horse. I was still in a suburban high school, with kids from largely Republican households. All told, i got to hear just about every argument, many of them highly inflammatory, and this sent me to the much-maligned middle, where I remain today. I as a voter am looking for who'll do the least damage; extereme ideologues of either side lose me from go.(Quote from Max Allan Collins: "I wish that the left wing and the right wing would flap their wings and fly the hell away.")Just three months into Obama's presidency, we are seeing him move slightly rightward on defense and national security issues; before the end of this year he should have the far left thoroughly pissed off at him. The far right hates him already, If the "base" mentality that afflicts both major parties continues to prevail, Obama will need the "middlers" more than ever - once he realizes that they're the ones who really elected him. /*/*/ As for GWBush, what always bothered me about his presidency was his obliviousness; it was as though he felt he was supposed to be enjoying himself, appearing in public, making speeches, letting others do the work for him. Those others were the neocons, who were more than happy to have a smiling front man. /*/*/ I'll close with an impertinent question, which will incredibly enough bring us back to the original topic of this thread: Do you or any of your old friends ahve any recollectons of Lewis Grizzard from his tenure as the Sun-Times's sports editor? I read his account in one of his books, in which he blames everybody but himself for the problems he had (he seemed to take winter weather as a personal affront). It's clear that he was unwilling to learn anything about Chicago or its people; years after living here, he actually wrote that Lincoln Avenue was the only street in the city that ran diagonally (one example that can serve for many others). His indignation over the fact that people like Bill Gleason and Jerome Holtzman might actually know their jobs without his telling them ... This is probably just old man's testiness; Mr. Grizzard is long gone now and God be good to him, as Father Greeley would say.Still, I am curious...
Ebert: Bill and Jerry were poets. Lew never fit in. How could you exist in Chicago and be unaware of diagonal streets? Did Daniel Burnham create the finest modern city plan in America for naught?
As for my statement, "The majority of intelligent people in this country are liberal," it means nothing more than it says. I believe if you graphed IQ against political orientation, you could prove it.
I'm not saying there are no intelligent conservatives. I'm speaking strictly numbers.
I feel proud to also be a tall, distinguished Canadian.
Do you honestly believe the man who gave an unwanted back-rub to Angela Merkel at the G8 summit had the foresight to plan something like this?
Frankly I'm tired of conspiracy theorists and I think they do the opposition's work for them, and waste potentially useful energy on useless nonsense, and misidentify the problem, and blah blah blah - but the obvious response is that if the administration had anything to do with it, it wasn't Bush. And his stupidity and obvious inadequacy for the office only makes any claim concerning what Dick Cheney might have been responsible for more plausible.
Cheney is living within like, a mile of CIA headquarters right now. He moved there just recently, just about the time he left office.
How can people NOT believe in conspiracies, however complex or evil they may be, when Dick Cheney is involved? I won't waste a moment considering whether or not he did it, because it's
a) unprovable, at least as far as we know
and
b) beside the point.
But if Sy Hersh or somebody broke a story five years from now that he did it, or if Cheney did a deathbed confession (knowing him it would be more of a deathbed gloat), would you really be surprised? I wouldn't. I wouldn't be surprised if they found out Cheney had raped and murdered dozens of women over the years and dumped their bodies in a lake. Or built a death ray. He's reached a level of evil no other public figure in my lifetime has ever reached, where one's ability to say 'Well let's not call anyone evil, let's be reasonable...' is actually exhausted, and we all have to admit - this guy is EVIL.
When's the movie coming out?
Also,
Just read "Stanley Dancer"'s (I hope that's an alias) posts about Barth, and I must say, that does seem to constitute cyberstalking. You quote back posts he made on an unrelated board under a different username, then try to embarrass him here by quoting him. That's stalking, besides being immature. Whenever you google the name of someone who is not a public figure, you're stalking that person. Good lesson to remember.
Also, the posts of his you quoted don't seem insane to me at all. Day O'Connor's actions or lack thereof during Bush v. Gore are a matter of public record. As for his conspiracy theory stuff, he goes further than I would based on the available evidence, but hardly so far as to seem crazy or even particularly unreasonable, especially considering what this administration did publically.
But your post is snotty at best and most of it is incredibly nasty and mean-spirited and cruel, and it fails because the people here are overwhelmingly liberal (as Roger said, most intelligent people are - sorry - it's not for no reason, either), and we like Ron. And based on that post, we, or at least I, don't like you.
Roger has to be somewhat diplomatic but I am under no such constraint and would recommend you return to whatever hole you crawled out of.
I'm really not concerned about being on or off your side, Dave, and I've previously expressed my disinclination to "believe" in anything that's unsupported or uncorroborated. The two biggest factors -- there are others, also -- arguing administration complicity would be the infamous Project for a New American Century "think" tank's paper "Rebuilding America's Defenses," wherein the need for a catalyzing event "like a new Pearl Harbor" to implement the usual neocon suspects' strategy of global military domination is made explicit, and just a little contemplation of the old question "Cui bono?" Who benefited most from 9/11 and all the administration's post-9/11 initiatives/schemes? To me, it's a toss-up between bin Laden/al Qaeda, and Cheney and his (and Bush's) cronies. Bush didn't "mastermind" anything -- he can barely mind anything, much less "mastermind" it -- but he and his cronies all benefited from their "preemptive" wars of aggression.
And there is no doubt that Bush could not have been behind anything that required thought or planning; your description of him as a "jabbering dupe" was spot-on. But Cheney? Rumsfeld? Wolfowitz? Cambone? Abrams? Feith (memorably described by Gen. Tommy Franks as "the fucking stupidest guy on the face of the earth")?
Simon appears to be using the Nick Naylor method of debate, as laid out in "Thank You For Smoking." Namely, rather than address the issue, make the other person wrong.
While I doubt Bush himself had any involvement in the 9/11 events, I could never shake the suspicion that some people in power, in his administration, are sick enough to justify tothemselves the "necessity" of the attack. Maybe they saw themselves as Ozymandias from "Watchmen."
My exchange-with-an-editor story: I was writing feature essays on film, and used the word "roisterous" to describe the behavior of the college students in L'Auberge espagnole/The Spanish Apartment (2002). My editor kept it in, but warned me that people stop reading an article when they read a word they don't know. She's a fine person and a generous editor, but I silently noted I didn't want such chickenshit readers. In other words, I'll never have a future in the newspaper business.
Ebert: Who doesn't know roisterous?
I once had an editor who wouldn't let me refer to the "Irish gift of gab" because it was racist.
Hi Roger. Okay, now that the newsroom is dying, can you newsies let the rest of us in on the esoteric codes? What does -30- mean? I am dying to know. :)
Ebert: It means a 30 em dash--the universal indication for the end of a story.
Ah, the memories of a newspaper man. Makes me just pine for the days of knocking back copious amounts of rum and Cokes (now to be replaced with Diet Coke) and chomping down on Cuban cigars the size of a gargantuan sushi roll. Working on deadline, crossing T's and dotting I's, and getting the appropriate facts straight from the source. And then winding down with more inebriation.
Ah, the good old times have passed us by and we're once again approaching a brave new world.
My wife (great legs, great boobs) and I met at an 8,000 daily in Western Pennsylvania in 1971. I was making $72 a week.
The newsroom was on the third floor next to the composing room and stereotype. When the presses started four floors below, someone would say with excitement "They're rolling."
We left that paper in 1972. I took a job at a then-35,000 daily for $145 a week and my wife "retired" because our income had doubled.
Memories of our early newspaper days were rekindled by your column, which my wife simply said "You'll enjoy this."
Goodness. Whistling in the newsroom. The editorial page editor screamed at me when I walked by his office whistling the theme from "The High and the Mighty."
The blue smoke that hung in the air. Everyone smoked. The only time we were ordered to stop was when a reporter set his waste basket on fire. We staged a "smoke break" five minutes before deadline. The ban was lifted.
Pica sticks, paste pots and sizing wheels. Oh my. I have a collection of pica sticks. I would ask a retiring veteran for his or hers. I kept mine.
Our managing editor refused to allow quote leads unless, he said, they began with "This is my body. This is my blood." He also said this about the importance of a beat: "If a sparrow dies, you better know about it."
And at our house, the term "-30-" is still used as a way to end a conversation or an arguement. Our children -- now parents themselves -- knew that when we said "Put a '-30-' on it," it meant to be quiet.
Thank you for turning my clock back 38 years.
Ebert: I've known copy editors who would insist that "This is my body. This is my blood" requires attribution.
Another interesting installment in your serialised octopus of an autobiography. How fortunate to be in a profession that one finds so fascinating. How fortunate to love life itself. And how fortunate to love it in any circumstance. To quote from Victor Frankl's book about his Ausschwitz experience
"Everything can be taken from a man but ...the last of the human freedoms - to choose one's attitude in any given set of circumstances, to choose one's own way."
Well, I just got my brand-spanking-new passport in the mail today. Tip of the hat to the State Department for processing it so quickly. Wag of the finger to whoever is responsible for the new design, though. Dear Lord! Whatever happened to subtlety? To taste? This is not a discreet, "I would like to be a citizen of the world" passport. This is an "I'm a mother-f***in' American, Goddamnit, and you'd better get out of my way and notice me!!!" kind of a passport. I'm not a fan of the chip, either. The irony of every single page bearing a different quote about the joys of liberty, bound in an un-encrypted, traceable computer chip is too bitter to laugh about. I hope that, in ten years' time, there will be a less cringe-worthy, apologetic look-inspiring renewal option.
Great to hear about the old days Roger, thanks! You are obviously sitting on a great book. Sign me up for the first edition.
I linked to your column via Poynter. Here's an interesting viewpoint that was also linked there; it's by Jeff Jarvis/Buzz Machine, enjoy!
The speech the NAA should hear
The Newspaper Association of America is meeting in San Diego this week and they’re preaching up at their own choir loft with angry, self-righteous fire and brimstone about their plight. Today, Google CEO Eric Schmidt will address them, but he’ll be polite because that’s the way he is and because there’ll be a few hundred aging but armed publishers with blunderbusses aimed at his heart. They need to hear a new message, a blunt message from the outside. Here’s the speech I think they should hear:
You blew it.
You’ve had 20 years since the start of the web, 15 years since the creation of the commercial browser and craigslist, a decade since the birth of blogs and Google to understand the changes in the media economy and the new behaviors of the next generation of - as you call them, Mr. Murdoch - net natives. You’ve had all that time to reinvent your products, services, and organizations for this new world, to take advantage of new opportunities and efficiencies, to retrain not only your staff but your readers and advertisers, to use the power of your megaphones while you still had it to build what would come next. But you didn’t.
You blew it.
And now you’re angry. Well, gentlemen - and that’s pretty much all I see before me: angry, old, white men - you have no right to anger. Instead, you are the proper objects of anger. The public should be angry with you for the poor stewardship you have exercised over the press and its service to society. Your journalists are angry at you for losing their jobs. Your pressmen and drivers and classified-ad takers are angry at you for the same reason (and at the journalists for paying attention only to their own plight). Your advertisers were angry at you for using your monopolistic power to overcharge them and for providing inefficient platforms and bad service for so long. But they’re not angry anymore because they left you for better advertising vehicles and better prices in a competitive marketplace.
But you’re the ones who are acting angry.
Yesterday, you delivered a foot-stomping little hissy fit over Google and aggregators. How dare they link to you and not pay you? Oh, I so want Eric Schmidt to tell you today that you’re getting your wish and that Google will no longer link to you. Beware what you wish for. You’d lose a third of your traffic overnight. If other aggregators (I work with one) and bloggers (I am one) and Facebook all decided to follow suit, you’d lose half your traffic. On most of your sites, only 20 percent of the audience in a day ever sees your homepage and its careful packaging; 4 of 5 readers instead come in through search and links. In the link economy - instead of the outmoded content economy in which you operate - Google and aggregators and bloggers are bringing value to you; they should be charging you for the value they bring. You should rise up today and give Mr. Schmidt a big thank you for not charging you. But you won’t, because you’ve refused to understand this new business reality.
You blew it.
Your Google snits don’t even address your far more profound problem: the vast majority of your potential audience who never come to your sites, the young people who will never read your newspapers. You all remember the quote from a college student in The New York Times a year ago, the one that has kept you up at night. Let’s say it together: “If the news is that important, it will find me.” What are you doing to take your news to her? You still expect her to come to you - to your website or to the newsstand - just because of the magnetic pull of your old brand. But she won’t, and you know it. You lost an entire generation. You lost the future of news.
You blew it.
You had a generation to reinvent the business but you did too little. I by all means include myself in that indictment because I spent my career in our industry: Guilty. I didn’t raise loud enough alarms (it felt as if they were too loud already) or accomplish enough change (not nearly enough). I blew it, too. But no last-minute hail-Mary passes will make up for our failings. Having not taken advantage of the last two decades to reinvent the news business, you’re not going to manage a rescue in two months, before the creditors come calling. That was your worst hail Mary: stoking up on debt and hoping to milk these cows for years to come. Mad cash-cow disease, that’s what too many of you had. Your other desperate moves: suddenly fantasizing that you can fix everything by going behind a wall (to tell with Google and its billions of readers!) and charging us because you think we “should” pay. Since when is a business plan built on “should?” I haven’t seen a sensible P&L justifying this dream from any of you. If you have one, please stand up show us now….. I thought so. Other desperation moves: fantasies of white knights from foundations buying you and letting you stay just the way you are…. government subsidies (do we even have to discuss the danger?)…. switching to not-for-profit, as if that suddenly takes away the need to sustain the business still… misguided, self-righteousness thinking that Google or cable companies owe you money, as if you have a God-given right to the revenue and customers you lost….. No, none of this will save newspapers and in your subconscious, at least, you know it. You know the truth.
You blew it.
So what can you do? Two years, even a year ago, I would have said that you had time to build the networks and frameworks and platforms that would support the ecosystem of news that will come next. I would have said you could retrain your staff to take on new responsibilities: organizing and supporting that ecosystem, curating the best, training people to be the best. I would have advised you to offer your staff members the opportunity to join that ecosystem, setting them up in business. I would have told you to take advantage of the efficiencies the web allows (do what you do best, link to the rest, I used to say). I would have argued that we need to invent new forms of marketing help for an entire new population of businesses-formerly-known-as-advertisers. I did say that. But the financial crisis only accelerated your fall. It didn’t cause the fall, it accelerated it. So now, for many of you, there isn’t time. It’s simply too late. The best thing some of you can do is get out of the way and make room for the next generation of net natives who understand this new economy and society and care about news and will reinvent it, building what comes after you from the ground up. There’s huge opportunity there, for them.
You blew it.
: LATER: When Eric Schmidt did take the podium at NAA, as reported by PaidContent’s Staci Kramer, he expressed some nicely ironic befuddlement at the AP going after them when Google has “a multimillion-dollar deal with the Associated Press not only to distribute their content but also to host it on our servers.” Then he did chasten the publishers:
But Schmidt came down harder on concerns about intellectual property and fair use: “From our perspective, we look at this pretty thoroughly and there is always a tension around fair use … I would encourage everybody, think in terms of what your reader wants. These are ultimately consumer businesses and if you piss off enough of them, you will not have any more.”
RIght, pissing off customers is not a business model. Not anymore.
Ebert: It always seemed curious to me that newspapers would give away what they also sold. I thought the answer was in pay sites, or a Pay Web apart from a Free Web. You'd have to have your local paper. Wouldn't you? Would you pay as much as a subscription cost? Remember, it wouldn't be generic content.
Thank you, Mr. Ebert. Such a poignant evocation of time and place. It seems a sin that none of that exists any more. Well - perhaps it does - in living memory. We all have places we hearken unto – talismans of youth, perhaps; remembrances of what always seems to begin with ‘long ago’ and end ‘gone fishing’. Isn’t it a pity those worlds no longer exists.
You really need to write much more than an essay, my friend. Some memories truly need to be preserved.
Gotta give credit where credit is due: The "jabbering dupe" title I gave Bush is from Hunter S. Thompson's 1994 eulogy of Tricky Dick. I join Hunter (and Roger) in pointing out that Bush fits the description quite a bit better. Youtube the Kennedy-Nixon debates and you will see what I mean.
That the Bush Administration orchestrated 9/11 (not benefitted from, which it most certainly did) is an extraordinary claim. Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence, and a letter stipulating that it would take a massive terrorist act (or something to that effect) to have a war with Iraq is not extraordinary. Who benefitted more from the war in Iraq is inconsequential.
http://skepdic.com/911conspiracy.html
http://www.sho.com/site/video/brightcove/series/title.do?bcpid=1305032885&bclid=1318874486
It is far more likely that the Bush Administration was incompetent(for the most part), not evil.
Doesn't it seem reasonable that a group of people who could secretly orchestrate something like 9/11 would have come up with evidence of Weapons of Mass Destruction, a far easier task?
What about the mishandling of Katrina? Even the most conservative of us (I assume) support FEMA, or at least support not letting our citizens die.
What did the Bush Administration gain from screwing that up? Isn't it far more probable that this group of colossal fuck-ups (a phrase I rarely use)could have prevented 9/11 but didn't prioritize national security?
To all Roger Ebert fans,
Please note the following press release from the City of Urbana, Illinios, the boyhood home of Roger Ebert. Urbana considers Roger to be an honored citizen, and as part of its 175th birthday celebration in 2008 it announced it will designate the site of the boyhood home of Mr. Ebert with a commemorative plaque. The dedication will occur during this year's Ebertfest and is noted below:
- - - - -
FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE—April 13, 2009
The City of Urbana is celebrating its connection with Roger Ebert. Come join Mayor Prussing & Councilmember Dennis Roberts in dedicating a commemorative plaque at 11 AM on Wednesday, April 22 in front of Mr. Ebert’s childhood home at 410 E. Washington Street in Urbana.
Roger Ebert—winner of the first Pulitzer Prize in Criticism in 1975 for his work as a film critic for the Chicago Sun-Times, journalist, and television personality—has strong ties to Urbana. He was born and raised here. Some of his childhood haunts include the Princess Theater and the Urbana Free Library. He began his journalism career while attending Urbana High School and went on to write for the Daily Illini and The News-Gazette.
Those who knew him when he lived here knew he was going to go on to great things. Not only was he a member of the student council while at Urbana High, he was also an honor student, an Illinois State Scholar, a National Merit Semifinalist, and won a trip to meet then-Vice President Richard Nixon. A story he wrote when he was a senior about an Urbana High football game won an Associated Press sports-writing contest even though he was competing against professional sportswriters. The accolades kept coming while he attended the University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign, including awards for his news-writing at the Daily Illini and his election as president of the National Student Press Association, which took him to Washington DC where he met President and Lady Bird Johnson. Ebert graduated from the University of Illinois in 1964 and joined the Chicago Sun-Times within the year.
Roger Ebert spent his formative years here in Urbana and has generously given much back to his hometown. Now Urbana would like to officially recognize his contribution to our community. Please join the City of Urbana in giving Roger Ebert a “Thumbs Up” at 11 AM on Wednesday, April 22 at 410 E. Washington Street in Urbana.
For more information, contact Rebecca Bird at the City of Urbana, (217) 384-2440, or by email at rlbird@city.urbana.il.us.
- - - - - - - - - -
A picture of a young Roger Ebert and an image of Ebert's boyhood home will be featured in the book "Images of America, Urbana" which is now in production at Arcadia Publishing Co., Chicago.
Ebert: I originally declined the honor, with gratitude. Too much like Abraham Lincoln! But then decided to accept on behalf of my parents. I remember the day, around my 20th birthday, after my dad died, when my mom finally burned the mortgage of the first house they moved into after they were married.
It is simply something I consider a logical possibility, not even rising to the level of a claim, Dave. As Paul states above, do we really think there are any limits to Cheney's ideological and cronyist malignancy? And I agree with you: to me, the single best logical argument against administration involvement in the planning and execution of 9/11 is their absolute incompetence, fueled by ideology and cronyism, on just about every single front.
Uh oh, Sally Field moment coming...you like me, you really like me! Seriously, thanks for the nice words, Paul.
And here's the funniest thing of all: as a Wharton alumnus, you'd think I'd be the one to be a hard-core conservative, but having worked in business intermittently through the years -- as long as I could tolerate the empty heads and suits -- I know exactly what killed the print journalism business. It was the emphasis on the business part (think of all the financial scams of "Lord" Black and David Radler here), the crunching of numbers, rather than on the journalism part. Quite simply, newspapers failed us, the public, and they failed democracy, going back at least to the Whitewater/Ken Starr/Monica follies right on through their almost unanimous cheerleading for Bush's wars and their failure to do any real investigative journalism of Bush and his cronies. Because of their focus on the no-depth story and ADD audience -- who are better served (or at least narcotized) by the immediate infotainment of television and much of the internet, anyway -- they lost the people who wanted to be informed.
Trivia time: What two streets in Chicago meet in two different places?
Ebert: I'm thinking it might involve Wacker.
Wait! Michigan Av. and Lake Shore Drive?
Wow, what a wonderful and unforgettable experience! Truly makes readers of the Sun-Times and admirers of you feel like we were there. Thanks for sharing it with us.
"By Roger Ebert" are the three most magical words in the language, drawing my eye the same way a bulls-eye attracts an arrow."
I just saw "Marley and Me" with my little cousin. Although it wasn't a realistic depiction of life as a contemporary newspaperman or woman, I think it still must be great to be a columnist...or a reporter. Here's the pertinent review: http://rogerebert.suntimes.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20081223/REVIEWS/812239991/1023
I just came across this blog and I had to laugh at how you described people smoking at their desks and the casual atmosphere of days gone by. It's strange to think of all the places you were allowed to smoke. Hospital rooms,the movies,offices etc.and it didn't seem strange. Mike Royko was so salty! But funny.You must have been such a polite young man.
Ebert: Only at times.
Roger, this piece is powerful stuff.
I was bitten by the journalism bug at 16 as well, but I'd already missed the days of type writers and smoke-filled newsrooms. I can't help but think about journalism and all that it has lost. We're at a turning point right now and I really hope that people wake up and realize how important those newsrooms once were.
Ron:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BFEvItNyUaM --Removed, Zach.
Wow! I've had a few responses from the man himself, but this is the first time I've been referenced by a fellow reader. Sorry that the clip got pulled; it was an old "Sesame Street" song; "I Want a Monster to Be My Friend." Originally banned because of admittedly plausible innuendo, it was still funny, and seemed appropriate at the time. Try again here:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5Dy53E4b5W0
Keep reading, keep debating, and keep using intelligence instead of belligerence and mud slinging!
"I may disagree with what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it."
Wow, Roger. I felt like I was there with your entry. You get to do what you are passionate about and you get paid for it.
It must be the great feeling in the world. I'm sure it would have been for me.
Cheers!
Ebert: Papers should beef up opinion, criticism, features, sports, arts, and develop distinctive writers. Forget about trying to be CNN.
Sounds like a list of cost-cutting targets for many papers today. (Well maybe not sports, I wouldn't know.)
Roger,
Wonderful piece!
As a former colleague at both the N-G and S-T, it brought back many memories and had me -- as the "kids" say, nowadays -- LMAO. The names you mentioned echoed the dinner conversation recently shared with two other 401 alums: Daredevil photographer Duane Hall and picture editor Scott Fincher.
Please allow me to join the cubicle discussion with an incident from the early '90s when I led the graphics department of a nonprofit's publishing operation. On a tour of the area into which our group was being moved in an expansion (yes, Virginia; businesses and even publications once upon a time actually grew!) we discovered a former stock-trading room that would serve as a great newsroom. This would allow our team to work more efficiently than in our former private offices.
The twentysomething writers and designers rebelled a short time after the relocation, demanding that cubicles be built around their desks. With doors, yet, and workplace rules instituted to require knocking when they were closed, as well as "no peeking over the wall," a la Kilroy.
Their argument: "We've been forced to sit in open classrooms for at least 17 years. Along with our degrees, we feel we've earned the right to some privacy in the workplace." Association management agreed with them. But the copy and design desks remained open work pods.
(Hope that flamer is not our old sports writer colleague, now "across the street," as we used to accurately say.)
Ebert: OMG. Didn't occur to me.
Roger, I saw one of the comments responding to your story about the glory days of the Sun-Times saying they had never heard the expression "stop the presses" They obviously did work there when Babette Bardot would enter the newsroom. With all the screaming of 'copy boy', banging of typewriters and such you would have thought you had gone deaf from the dead silence that covered the newsroom when she walked in. Babette was one of Russ Meyer's stars with a special attraction to you. Being a photographer for the Sun-Times and shooting many pictures of her, we became friends. When she would arrive in town she would call me and one of her first questions was "is Roger around". I would stand in the newsroom just to watch the reaction of the hardened reporters when she came bouncing into the room. Then there was the day you and I spent together with Paul Newman campaigning for Eugene McCarthy in Wisconsin. The women at the shopping malls would have the same expression as the men in our newsroom when Babette arrived.
Duane
Ebert: Ah, yes. Babette Bardot. Star of Russ's "Common Law Cabin."
http://lh4.ggpht.com/martinklasch/SMAfnuhxYQI/AAAAAAAAFyA/YLskZjTa4zQ/20080401_fc0a3d61b771d7d908e8VsbFbxlX3Um8.jpg
Roger,
I have read nearly every published piece of work you have written over the decades. I watched Siskel & Ebert (in whatever form and title it took) religiously since I was a kid in the late 70s. And I wanted to take this moment to tell you that what you composed above and chose to share with us is the best piece, in my opinion, you have ever written.
I can't count the times I've watched Citizen Kane, All the President's Men, The Front Page, Ace in the Hole, Superman (I didn't watch for the tights and cape, I watched for The Daily Planet), etc. just to try and be a part of the old-school newspaper experience that passed my generation by and that you bring to such vivid life in your piece.
None of the films I've watched regularly have taken me closer to the experience as your reminiscing in the journal above. For the 15 minutes it took me to read your piece, savoring every word and photograph, I felt like I was part of the newspaper industry in its prime.
And I cried.
I cried for days that I only observed as a child and watched fade in my teen years. I cried for what I fear is the end of investigative journalism in its truest form and a bold Fourth Estate.
And I longed.
I longed to be a part of this experience. Thanks for letting me feel like an insider, if for only a quarter of an hour, to the amazing world you got to be part of and to feel I had a brief gig with the best damn job in the whole damn world.
Sincerely,
Alex
Most of what I know of the history of American Journalism is what I have seen in movies. But did not the profession change, and change again, and change again? Ben Franklin was a news guy. Mark Twain...do you think of the guys who covered the Civil War as anything but unwelcome annoying little men with twitchy little moustaches? Like the Thin Man with yellow teeth and a derby.
What I'm getting at is that journalism seemed to take an inclusive turn at some point, after the local burough papers laid down their swords and were consumed by The Times, in whatever city, they all got co-opted into some mega entity known as The Times. Not unlike neighborhood weavers giving up the ghost to the fabric factory downtown. But that very moment seemed to coincide with a blue collar sensibility in the newsroom. High school diplomas could get you in, it seems.
And in great granite buildings, heavy atop quake rumbling printing machines arose the journalism from between the wars. A lot of our identity comes from then, like the way we continue to romanticize prize fighting in print--things were born at that moment that still linger. It was the moment of empire for American journalism--blessed with a cast of characters who were burly and brainy, drinkers and thinkers, fighters and writers. Guys who wore their fedoras on the backs of their heads while they callously communed with clattering keyboards of their craft :-).
And then the world turned, and the radio sister of print morphed into the TV step mother, who arrived just in time to bring us the muddy blood gulping horror of all those asian rice paddies. It was visceral, immediate, and powerful.
And that callous cast of characters saw their world change before them, and if they were looking for a harbinger of new world that would not be a part of, looking through their tattered curtains of tobacco smoke as they sat back in their squeaky chairs, they needed look no farther then the new kid walking in the door: endomorphic, with clean fingernails tipping soft hands, sweater wearing--like a villain from an Ayn Rand novel, puffy and unlined, gently non-judgmental behind thick eyeglasses, who didn't know a thing about hockey. And they called him Dodger.
Sorry, Roger, but try to see your place in the river of history. You may fancy yourself as a only a witness and not realize that men with Beatles haircuts--collegy leftish effete men like yourself, heralded the end of the two-fisted ink stained world of the old 20th century empire of journals and novels. The angel of cubicle death came in perched on your shoulder. Sorry!
Ebert: Effete? How well do you know me?
Collegy? I was in newspapers before I left high school.
Leftish? OMG! I must have been the first in newspaper history, except for Ben Franklin and Mark Twain!
Ron Barth wrote: Trivia time: What two streets in Chicago meet in two different places?
Devon & Sheridan meet in three places, Elston & Milwaukee meet twice & Circle in Norwood Park has no beginning or end.
And Roger, you wrote that Jay McMullen & his girlfriend were naked on the balcony of the Executive House.
Was that GF, Jane Byrne or an earlier one.
Ebert: An earlier one. Do you think I'd suppress a story like that?
Mr. Ebert, you certainly touched tender memories and passions with your spot-on commentary on newspapering. Some 35 years after I started working as an ink-stained wretch I still have a proportion wheel, a pica pole AND the metal nameplate from an old UPI teletype machine (And I'm sure I could scrounge up a grease pencil or two if I tried). I count myself lucky that I was privy to newspapering as it should be, was able to work with editors who lived that life and passed along what they lived to a younger generation. I spent 25 years at a family-owned paper in eastern Ohio where the corporate dilution of newspapers didn't infiltrate, at least not until of late. Those were great years.
I'm at one of those corporate entities now, and hope to cling to the soggy newsprint liferaft until the last possible second.
It is sad that future generations won't have that same feeling of getting to see their bylines in print — seeing your byline online really isn't the same (or, maybe it IS different, and romantic, for the newer generation). Maybe there will be a resurrection of sorts and maybe we will get to see a rebirth for newspapering at some level. There will be an entire generation, however, who won't have a clue that the blog they just read was more biased then truthful. Yes, newspapers could be biased, but they could also be relied upon.
At any rate, thank you for the good read, for the glimpse at what used to be. 35 years later, after being a reporter, rewrite man, photographer, copy editor, columnist, designer and nearly ever other newsroom job, I never thought I'd be looking at what I still do as "history."
I was thinking Elston & Milwaukee, but was unaware of Devon & Sheridan. Three places?!? Where? As for the circle, I always considered it one of the circles of Hell, to the point that although I lived on the 5800 block of Oketo, perhaps 3/4 mile to a mile away from the circle, I rarely ventured north of Talcott and east of Harlem there. Lost too many times.
Dear Roger,
You are not only a tribute to our wonderful profession, but also to our city of Chicago. A native of the city, I now teach high school journalism and school newspaper at an international school in Seoul, South Korea. What a daily joy it is. Thanks for your inspirational blog.
Would comparing IQ tests according to the politics of the takers yield any result that couldn't be explained by chance? After all, the far right has at least as many academics as the far left. GW Bush is a Yale graduate,as was Gene Siskel. I, on the other hand, never attended college at all; does this make me inferior on an intelligence level to anyone who did attend? Does my political moderation make me indifferent, or merely distrustful of glibness? Comes to that, how would you know what I think or feel about any subject unless I tell you myself? Mostly, I'm just guessing, like anyone else who isn't a hard-line ideologue. I have no idea what my IQ might be; it's been years since I took one of those tests, and from what I remember, they were mostly about solving puzzles, which I was pretty good at as a kid (not so much anymore). Anyway, an IQ test might measure how smart a person is, but it would tell us nothing about how wise he might be - hardly the same thing.
During the quiz show craze of the 50s, the biggest prize winner was a man named Teddy Nadler, who won about $230,000 on THE $64,000 QUESTION and CHALLENGE. Nadler was a letter carrier in St. Louis, uneducated, who had the ability to memorize lists of various things, and repeat them back on demand. Jack Barry, the host of TWENTY-ONE, which competed with the 64,000 shows, once disparaged Nadler (and by extension his shows), by calling him "a freak with a sponge memory", as opposed to Charles Van Doren and other TWENTY-ONE winners. (I have the TV GUIDE interview in which Barry says this; he doesn't say Nadler's name, but it's clear by the timing of the story that he's talking about the competition, and not about Herbert Stempel - this was long before the scandal broke.) Like many before and after him, Nadler went through his winnings in less time than it took him to win them, and wound up living hand-to-mouth - he had no real skills beyond memorization, and you can't really make a living at that. While he was winning, Nadler was held up by advocates of the quizzes as someone to be admired for his application in learning those lists, but it was really no more than a knack he had. It's a strange story - maybe someday someone will make a movie of it.
I seem to have strayed a bit from tne point I was making, so I'll just close it off by saying that smartness or wisdom is not as easily measureable as we might want it to be - least of all if we use ourselves as the yardstick.
Hey, how about that - somebody finally told me what HTML means! Today paragraphs - tomorrow italics!!
I grew up in Chicago during the era of four newspapers. My Dad would buy three of them and I'd by the fourth (for Royko and Lisagor). Each paper was unique.
Subsequently it seemed I was on the death tour of columists (Royko, Caen, Watson), ending up in Seattle where the city ended up with one paper. After Watson died there wasnt anything worthwhile in either paper. The prose was foolish and both lacked a critical eye towards the city. I quit reading them.
I did keep reading the NYT, LATimes, the Washington Post and both Chicago papers. Recently bought a Kindle and keep up with these papers via Amazon. Didnt think I'd like the device (bought it mainly for work documents) since I like the physical nature of books. Was surprised to love it for newspapers. Think papers should (like cell phones) give them away at a reduced cost in return for extended subscriptions. It does eliminate distribution/printing (and consequently jobs). But if the content is maintained it is a good way to read papers (and technical books, manuals but not books - I'm still holding out for regular books).
to: Dave Van Dyke on April 10, 2009 8:27 AM
What about the mishandling of Katrina? Even the most conservative of us (I assume) support FEMA, or at least support not letting our citizens die.
What did the Bush Administration gain from screwing that up?
I'll give that one a shot, as a conservative. The most conservative of us do not look at FEMA, or any federal agency, as a first responder in a disaster - and thus don't look at Katrina as principally a Bush Administration failure.
Start with the city government. A corrupt entity ruled by one party for many years. Did they do their best to not let their citizens die? Hardly. Do we need to look at the photo of the flooded buses that weren't used to ferry people out of danger again? The manager's of New Orleans took federal money for years and misspent it and did not protect their citizens when crunch time came.
How about the state government, and the Governor who panicked and had to be begged by the Bush Administration to call out the National Guard in time.
FEMA is not a first responder, they are a after-the-fact damage mitigator. The one lesson you should have learned from Katrina is that if you're counting on them to protect you from danger you're making a mistake. That goes for whoever is President.
I will say that Bush's comment "You're doing a great job, Brownie" was not his finest moment. He was just trying to buck up his cabinet member in a trying time. But, it certainly came off as tone deaf.
Katrina was the largest disaster to ever hit the United States, and lot's of people at all levels were unprepared for it. Yet, you guys want to lay it all on Dubya. Worse yet, some of you want to paint him as evil. Katrina is not a story about George W. Bush. It's a story about trusting government too much to protect you. That's the conservative lesson from this.
Great, Funny. Thanks.
"True characters back in those days"; Is this why newspapers aren't doing as well now?
"three most magical words"; I've wondered what's the deal with Economist reporters, as they remain anonymous.
~
~
Hi Roger. I'm writing to you about this because I'm not sure who else to ask.
I'm looking for a Chicago based NBA writer who you may (or may not) have heard of. His name is Marty Burns. For the last ten years or so, I thought he was the finest basketball writer there was. I loved his no-nonsense style, his seeming lack of self-importance, and his insight. He didn't have Jack McCallum's gift of visualization, but he taught me more things about the modern game than anyone else.
He was a senior writer for Sports Illustrated for over a decade I believe, and was a fan of the hometown Bulls. One of his most memorable pieces was about the passing of his dog (who was named Jordan) which was about as touching as your recollections of your dear Blackie.
Near the end of last year, I noticed he was writing less and less and my fears were realized, he left Sports Illustrated. Apparently there are rumors he may have been bought out of his contract, which is consistent since the invaluable Rick Reilly has already left them. Jack McCallum is also rumored to have been bought out. If film criticism is dying, serious sports journalism at SI is in the morgue.
I love basketball. And with the NBA Playoffs around the corner, it is dreadful not to read Marty Burns's analyses and musings. I have written SI, and all of their basketball writers (still there and elsewhere) wondering where he has gone, but to no avail. If it's not too much to ask, could you find out for me how he is? What he's up to? And if at all possible, let him know he is dearly missed?
*Keeping my fingers crossed* Here's his archive -> http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/writers/marty_burns/archive/index.html
For eight years I worked for a two man monthly done the old fashioned way with wax paste up and a light table working until three in the morning. After that I'd drive the finished paper to the printers and shout instructions over the roar of the web press. I had to sell ads, write political satire, film reviews and once in a while do an actual hard news feature on something the mainstream press had ignored.
I have been away from that for ten years now and I still miss it. I now make four times what I did then but I was proud of what I did for a living in those days.
Hi Roger.
I am curious if you have any thoughts on how the "tea party" story was covered in the press on April 15th, and if it has any bearing on the decline of some media.
I personally was appalled by the coverage on CNN and MSNBC and several of the major papers. I think it was a defining moment in American journalism, and not in a good way.
The allegation, for example, that was widespread in those media that Fox News instigated and/or sponsored the tea parties across the country is just a flat out lie. It's mis-reporting at it's worst.
I watched the tea party movement grow in the grassroots from the very first one in Seattle back in January. The impetus for the movement was at the local level. The structure for organizing them on the same day, on the logical choice of tax day, came from the the blogosphere on sites like FreeRepublic.com and MichelleMalkin.com. That's where I saw maps spring up to help people locate a tea party near them. (I was looking for one.) Not Fox News.
Fox News did recognize it as a national news story. Why wouldn't it be? Tea Parties were organized in all 50 states - it had national range. They were representative of the growing trepidation in half of our population that we are rushing headlong into socialism and unsustainable debt. It's a news story. Fox News covered it, full tilt. Yes, the opinion shows like Hannity showed an opinion. The hard news segments like "Special Report" did not. They covered it as a news story.
CNN, MSNBC, and I'm guessing some print media did not cover it so much as mock it. In some eggregious cases the did so with great vulgarity and glee - with the "teabagging" theme. This is professional journalism in 2009? Teabagging jokes on CNN? Has the media really reached that new low of anchors like Cooper and Olberman joking about teabagging? Yes. Can you imagine making teabagging jokes in your byline when you were a reporter?
How about the video of the elitist CNN reporter (Susan Roesgen) dismissing the tea party in Chicago as "not family viewing". Are you kidding me? Have you seen the anarchy-fests that the left puts on when they rally at a G20 Summit. No comparison. That was a CNN news reporter editorializing, with smug disdain for the public at the event.
The coverage on CNN/MSNBC/NY Times et al was an outrageous disconnect with, and a disrespecting of, a significant fraction of news consumers like myself. There are consequences for that, in ratings and circulation.
Your thoughts?
Ebert: I thought the thoughtful people involved in it were upstaged by the loony right.
Randy Masters's comment above gave me pause as I recalled an old movie - "Meet John Doe", directed by Frank Capra. For those who haven't seen it lately (or at all), a brief recap: a reporter (Barbara Stanwyck) about to be fired by her paper's new owners seeks to keep her job by writing a fake letter to the editor. In the guise of an outraged citizen, she deplores the conditions of the current Depression and threatens suicide as a protest. She then sells the paper's management on turning this and ubsequent letters into a full-scale campaign to sell papers. The "John Doe" letters catch on locally, attracting the attention of the owner (Edward Arnold)of the national chain that bought the paper, who decides to take the campaign national. This requires that the home paper hire someone to be the public face of "John Doe"; the job is given to a derelict (Gary Cooper), who wants an arm operation that will enable him to go back to being a baseball pitcher. As "grass-roots" interest grows, Stanwyck is suddenly stricken with idealism; instead of just griping about how bad things are, "John Doe" should be calling for people to make things better themselves. Meanwhile, Arnold's "mainstream media"- in those days, newspapers and radio - swings into full gear, promoting the "John Doe Movement" into a coast-to-coast phenomenon. What Arnold really wants is a national political power base, but for the moment he keeps that to himself and his circle. Stanwyck is full of the good she's doing with the speeches she's writing for Cooper-"Doe", not realizing that it's all being used by Arnold for his own ends.
Well, if you've seen the movie, you know what happens, and if you haven't, then see the movie. The point in bringing it up here is to remind us all of the old saying: "The more things change, the more they stay the same." There is no question that the role played by Fox News in the tea parties was one of full-out promotion rather than objective coverage. Of course the "opinion shows" gave opinions, but that's the prime-time lineup, the channel's showplace. The same is true, unfortunately, with MSNBC's anti-coverage; in the midst of the feuding newschannels,the original intent of the protest is bound to get lost. Each channel carefully chooses what it will cover, in order to make the Other Guys look bad - and they always do. Another old saying: "When you point the finger at someone, you're pointing three back at yourself."
Side notes on the personalities:
(1) Bill O"Reilly always uses his audience figures as an absolute justification for his boorish on-air conduct.Within his limits, he's correct; he does have the largest audience in prime-time cable news. That's like the batting championship of the Little League. The detective shows on TNT and USA outpoint him exponentially, even in reruns. We also have to remember that O'Reilly has a powerful appeal for those who don't agree with him; they watch in the hope of seeing him blow his stack on camera (unlikely, of course, since Fox protects him by not doing his show live, and by only booking in-studio guests who either agree with the Grate Man or are amiaable placid types like Alan Colmes or Susan Estrich).
(2) Keith Olbermann is getting just as bad as his archenemy Billo: only booking guests he agrees with, cherry-picking quote and images to make the Others look as bad as possible, snarky jokes at the expense of the Others - all straight out of the O'Reilly playbook. Olbermann is a far better writer than O'Reilly (which isn't saying much, I'll admit), but the agenda always wins out. With the Tea Party business, allowing Janeane Garofalo to play the race card was inexcusable (at least Ms. Garofalo had the sense to wear sleeves that night; lord knows what the reaction to her tattoos would have been).
(3) If Sean Hannity wishes to deify Ronald Reagan, that's his business, but somebody ought to tell him that he has the wrong type hair to duplicate Reagan's hairstyle; on Hannity, it looks like badly dyed chia.
(4) Glenn Beck = Limbaugh Lite.
(5) When are all of these guys - left or right, male or female, animal, vegetable or mineral - when are they going to stop trying to be comics? It's getting harder and harder to extract information from the punchlines.
So much for amateur punditry. I think I'll have KFC for lunch - but I'm not having the hot wings.
if i could i'd like to ask randy masters a question
where were you people when we wasted $2 trillion on an unnecessary war?
Wonderful; it reminds me of the stories our matriarch of the newsroom tells of the "good old days" when the building was full of copy editors who would smack your hand with their pica pole if you dared touch their layout.
She was the first female City Editor in the paper's 200 year history, and I love the story she told about the time that the police beat reporter went on vacation and insisted that she was the only person to do the job in his absence. The entire newsroom was abuzz because the police were a pretty rough crew and might curse in front of her -- and she was a *girl*!
She's in her late 70s/early 80s, and continues to report, write and layout without missing a beat; a treasure.
is is why I hate the internet, you can't romanticize it.
Sure you can - in ten years the early days of Facebook will be romanticized.
And you can romanticize anything - plenty of people still romanticize the antebellum South with plantations full of slaves.
I can't get nostalgic for the days when white men ran everything, without question and gays were in the closet.
But if you're a straight white man, those days must truly seem like a magical time, when millions of people were prevented from competing with you for the good jobs and you were on top of the world.
Until you died of lung cancer or alcoholism.
Not just cigarettes. Bottles. One side of the Sun Times newsroom was all windows facing the river, the other lockers. And in some lockers brown bags with bottles. We we drank at lunch and we drank after work. On the ni