“Bits of History” Items

Attracting and Retaining Readers, 1986

For as long as I was in the newspaper industry, I’ve heard the refrain “we need to attract new and retain our current readers.”

Mostly, in the “olden days” that meant a new promotion or some kind of circulation push [cut the prices and retain them when the full-cost renewal hits].

The American Press Institute held a seminar in November 1986 and invited 21 editors, publishers, circulation directors and other executives to focus on:

• Meeting the needs of a changing newspaper audience.
• Increasing household penetration.
• Reader retention.
• Fresh methods for marketing and promoting the newspaper.

While the report on the conference focus on aspects of the newspaper industry that are revenue driven — advertising and circulation– there was some discussion about improving the overall editorial product.  From the section titled “Relating to Readers,” Chris Anderson, editor of the Orange Country Register urged an upgrade of the quality of content:

“Quality sells newspapers. But it doesn’t come easily, and it doesn’t come free.” It is increasingly apparent, he said, that newspapers must make long-­term investments in editorial content that arc not immediately cost-­justifiable – but will have long-term benefit. He listed these as primary ingredients in a newspaper’s quality: 

  1. We are specific to our own set of readers. We “belong” to them.
  2. There are things for lots of different readers. Our readership is a coalition of special-interest groups
  3. We make things easy to find and to read. Consistency and packaging arc especially important. 
  4. A good newspaper is compelling and personal. “Readers have no obligation to take the rubber band off. It’s easier to watch TV.”
  5. We involve our readers, and help them tell their stories.
  6. Professionalism is painstaking attention to detail.

There was one page on the potential of computers, at least when it comes to circulation, to help newspapers understand their market and where their subscribers live.

The booklet about the conference has recommendations are well past their “sell by” date. The marketplace has upended advertising and circulation revenue streams. And that left many newspaper readers, or the remaining newspaper readers, high and dry.

Here’s a summary generated by AI about the seminar
Attracting and Retaining Readers: What the Industry Was Saying in 1986

📅 American Press Institute Curtis Seminar, November 1986
📍 Reston, Virginia

In the fall of 1986, a select group of newspaper editors, designers, and media scholars gathered at the American Press Institute for the Curtis Seminar on Attracting and Retaining Readers. The purpose: to examine declining readership trends and explore strategies that might reverse them. Though digital disruption had not yet arrived, there was already a strong sense that change was needed.

The seminar materials read like a cross between a strategic workshop and a newsroom therapy session. Titles such as “Understanding Reader Behavior,” “Packaging the Paper,” and “Reversing the Downward Trend” reflect a growing awareness that traditional newspaper practices were losing traction with modern audiences. Participants tackled tough questions about design, content hierarchy, service journalism, and how to make newspapers more relevant—especially to younger readers and women, demographics that were already disengaging.

There’s a notable urgency in the recommendations: trim excess verbiage, lead with utility, give readers navigational tools, and design with intention. The themes of clarity, connection, and relevance emerged again and again, with a shared belief that newspapers needed to better align with the everyday concerns of readers—not just editorial priorities.

What’s especially striking is the vocabulary of experimentation and evolution—terms that feel contemporary but were clearly part of the industry’s discourse nearly 40 years ago. Participants acknowledged that reader expectations had changed, and that the paper’s design, structure, and tone needed to evolve as well.

The Curtis Seminar offers a revealing snapshot of a profession in self-reflection. It shows that even before the rise of the internet, journalism leaders were grappling with how to hold onto their audience, adapt to shifting habits, and make newspapers more useful, relevant, and readable. Many of those questions remain just as pressing today.

Front Pages from the Kennedy Assassination

The United Press International published a collection of front pages from the four days following the assassination of President John F. Kennedy. Sixty years later it is remarkable look at American journalism and the power of the front page. And it is also a reminder of how many newspapers have been lost [closed, merged] since that time.  The magazine’s publisher wrote this about the collection:

FOUR DAYS IN NOVEMBER
The responsibility of the American Newspaper to give its readers accurate, swift, and in this case, tragic and appalling news, was never met with greatwr skill and devotion than on the four days of November 22, 23, 24, and 25, 1963.

Despite the awesome pressure of meeting deadlines under such sorrowful conditions, millions of words poured from reporters’ typewriters, thousands of copy editors checked stories they never wanted to see. In the so-called “back shops” of newspapers, large medium and small, linotype operators punched keys which rec­orded for all to read a story which even the typesetters could hardly believe. Pressmen assembled plates which should never have been needed, and pushed the button which triggered the high whine of a high-speed press.

Deliverers delivered newspapers to newsboys and news merchants who sold them to readers who didn’t want to believe the headlines they saw were true.

Other items are listed here.

Malofiej Infografia Awards, 1994

In 1994 I was a judge at the 2nd annual Malofiej Awards for Infographics, which were organized by the Spanish chapter of the Society for News Design (SND-E) for accomplishments in journalistic infographics. The awards were given each March in Pamplona, Spain.
 
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia:

The awards are named for Argentine designer Alejandro Malofiej, who made simple and creative graphics.[6]

The Malofiej were an essential reference for their prestige and drawing power. The Awards, considered to be the Pulitzers for infographics, the professional workshop “Show, Don’t Tell!” and the Conference in Pamplona annually bring together the best infographics artists from media (newspapers, magazines, agencies) from around the world.

On October 1, 2021, the organizers announced that the awards would be paused “while we open a period of reflection to think about how to continue with them in the future.”

The organizers published a book with the award winners.  One of the questions asked of the judges was “How do you see the present and the future of infographics?” Here is my answer:

Informational graphics use in newspapers is coming to an important junction. One direction is to continue on our present course, with much energy, effort and space spent on large, complicated and time ­consuming graphics. The other way would call for a re-examination of the overall purpose and value of presenting information via a graphic or visual form. I’m worried that if we continue on our present path, the fundamental strength and value of graphics will be diluted and devalued as editors, facing increased pressures to make the most effective use of space, will rebel against the often-excessive “mega­graphic”. A more optimistic view would have editors – visual and written- jointly decide on the most effective presentation method and the more appropriate use of resources, which include staff and space.

Teaching College Students, Poynter 1984

In spring of 1984, Mario Garcia invited me to teach at the College Seniors/graduate Students Newspaper Design Seminar August 12-18.  Twelve students were selected for this Poynter fellowships in Newspaper Design.  Here’s what Garcia wrote  about the seminar in his invitation letter:

Obviously, the scope of this seminar is very different from that of the professional seminars you have taught for us in the past. These are students whose experience is limited to work on their campus newspapers, plus whatever time they have spent in newspaper internships. In fact, a majority are currently interning.

Therefore, our objective is to accomplish the following:

1) To train students beyond the basics of layout and design.
2) To introduce them to the role of the newspaper designer in today’s newspapers.
3) To showcase their talents to members of the industry who may be interested in young, capable (but inexperienced) newspaper designers.
4) To create a pool of young designers who will be way above the level of their peers entering the newspaper field.

I taught a couple of sessions:

Thursday, August 16
9 – 10:15 a.m.           Informational graphics as design tools
10:15 a.m. – noon   Informational graphics, continued. Exercise : Putting the facts together through the creation of an informational graphic
LUNCH
1:30 – 3 p.m.             Session continues
REST OF AFTERNOON FREE

Writing/Graphics: Serving the Reader

In 1988, under the direction of Mario Garcia, The Poynter Institute held a seminar titled: Writing/Graphics: Serving the Reader. This three-day seminar kicked off with an opening “debate” between Garcia and Roy Peter Clark, associate director of the Institute. It was called “The Great Debate: Words vs. Pictures or Who’s on First?” The keynote was by Ed Miller, former editor of the Allentown Call-Chronicle, one of the more innovative newspapers at that time.

I had the honor of doing one of the morning breakout sessions: Collaborative Learning in the Newsroom. Frankly, I don’t remember the session but I’ll look around for my notes and maybe the presentation I used.  At that time I was assistant managing editor of The Arizona Republic.

Interesting footnote: A few days after this seminar, I would be at the American Press Institute seminar on the future of design in 2000

Big City Newspaper: Chicago Tribune in 1975

The Chicago Tribune Marketing Department, sometime in 1975 [my guess] produced a guide to the newspaper for the educational services department of the company. It was a look, written for consumers [young ones] about how the Tribune was created — from reporter to editor to presses. The guide even had instructions on how to fold a newspaper page into a pressman’s hat. What’s nice about this guide is the photographs of so many of the people I remember working with. [And it does have a picture of me looking at a picture page.]

The Tribune at this time was publishing both morning and afternoon editions.  We called it the 24-Hour Tribune.  There were even t-shirts. Here’s a bit about that unique time:

In 1974, the Chicago Tribune became a 24-hour newspaper with fresh editions morning, afternoon and evening. The shift from being a morning newspaper to the24-hour publication cycle meant that The Tribune was available whenever a reader wanted it.

The publishing cycle begins in late afternoon with the Green Streak edition which contains late stock market quotations. Next off the press is the Midwest edition, designed primarily for circulation outside Chicago and suburbs.

The Three Star Morning Final comes next–it’s the edition you’ll find delivered to your doorstep in the mornings. The Four Star Morning Sports Final follows; you’ll find it on the newsstands in the morning with the night’s sport results. The Five Star Morning Turf Final is available later in the morning. Completing the 24-hour publication cycle is the afternoon 7 Star Final for afternoon home delivery customers and afternoon newsstand sales.

The publisher at the time of publication was Stan Cook; the editor was Clayton Kirkpatrick. Kirkpatrick was the person who hired me in 1972. There a nice picture of Bill Jones, one of the best editors at the paper during my tenure. Jones, who became managing editor, died way too early at age 43.

If you want a look at what it took to produce a daily newspaper, this is a good guide. For me, it is fond memories.

Review of Local Websites, 1999

In 1999, the PAFET group did an important information sharing project. Each group reported on their web site strategy and methods used to execute that strategy, marketing implementations, measurement of success, content mix and traffic.  Among the newspaper sites that reported was:

  • The Arizona Republic, AZ
  • Dallas Morning News, TX
  • Providence Journal, RI
  • St. Louis Post-Dispatch, MO
  • News & Observer, NC
  • The Press Enterprise, CA
  • Sacramento Bee, CA
  • Star News, IN
  • Star Tribune, MN
  • Town Talk, LA

There is also a table that compares all of the website traffic among PAFET members.

Looking to the Future: 1986 to 2001

In the past, journalism conventions serving management and editors, such as the Associated Press Managing Editors conference, were major events.  Hundreds of participants, dozens of panels and speeches.  So important that the APME published what the called the “Red Book.”  This was a record of the proceedings so those who could not attend would learn what was discussed.

In 1987, the Red Book reported on a panel held in Cincinnati, OH, on “Newspapers After 2001.”  The panel was tasked to look ahead 15 years.  Among the participants:

  • James K. Batten, president, Knight-Ridder, Inc.
  • Louis D. Boccardi, president and general manager, The Associated Press
  • John J. Curley, president and chief executive officer. Gannett Newspapers
  • Katherine W. Fanning, editor, Christian Science Monitor
  • Jeff Greenfield, media critic and columnist, ABC
  • James Hoge, president, New York Daily News
  • C.K. McClatchy, president, McClatchy Newspapers
  • Burl Osborne, president, Dallas Morning News
  • Eugene C. Patterson, chairman and chief executive officer, Times Publishing Company, St. Petersburg, Fla.
  • William O. Taylor, chairman and chief executive officer. Boston Globe
  • Chris Urban, Urban and Associates 

Reading over this edited transcript of the discussion, I was struck how little the panel got right. In fact, I think most of them missed the speeding “technology bus” that was about to crash into their newsprint based business and scatter their profits and employees to the wind. There was discussion about the declining readership — one panelist suggest the industry encourage literacy — and the fragmented advertising market. There were a couple of notable mentions of technology.  Here’s one from Kay Fanning:

We’re being increasingly bombarded by trivia and through the progress of technology it will get worse and worse. With all the world coming to our back door in terms of satellite communications and transportation, the link-up of the global stock market, all aspects of computer networking, newspapers will need a content that offers the citizen a pathway through this hail of trivia. That content will require more substance, more quality, offer more understanding rather than just a lot of information. I believe in the simple bromide of the better mousetrap. If we have a quality that is relevant to the citizens and to the public interest we can easily raise the numbers from 40 to 60 percent. 

I did like the comments from John Curley about improving the visuals of newspapers to make them more appealing:

Presentation is part of it too. Color, graphics, and our ability to do more in that area will be important. I don’t mean to pick on the Cincinnati Inquirer, since we own it, but in yesterday’s paper we went 11 pages in the Life Section without a graphic or photo. and a lot of the contents suggested that there could have been some there. I don’t think that is atypical of most newspapers, and it’s a weakness in a lot of our newspapers too.

Curley was the first editor of USA Today, hence he knew about color and graphics. USA Today was launched four years earlier, in 1982. in 1988, the American Press Institute had a major design seminar looking at the future of newspapers. It was called Design 2000.  Details are elsewhere on this site.  Lots of graphics and color in those prototype newspapers.

TV News’ Future

Also at the convention was Lawrence Grossman, president of NBC News. He gave a talk on “Television News After 2001.” He was sort right when he said:

My thesis is that if you look 15 years ahead to the year 2001, it will be much like what we see now in television news, just as when you look back to 1970, television news was basically like what you’re seeing now.

But take that out a few more years and he was very, very wrong.  He got a few things right.  It was an interesting read.

Electronic Photo Workshop, 1990

Back in the late 1980s and early 1990s, digital photography equipment was rare [and expensive].  I’m not just talking about cameras, but also all the equipment needed to process those digital files into a format that could be used in daily newspaper production. Learning to use these digital photographic tools was the goals the National Press Photographers Association‘s Electronic Photo Workshop.

In November 1990, the EPW was in Tempe, AZ and I served as “Executive Editor.”  The real work, however, done by the workshop co-chairs: John Cornell, Newsday, and Bill Hodge, Long Beach Press Telegram. There were more than 90 participants [see page two of the PDF] and more than two dozen vendors, including Adobe and Apple. 

The published work from the conference was a 32-page tabloid that has photos and stories about life in Arizona. Each story used different combinations of equipment.

I liked what I wrote for the introduction to the publication:

This newspaper is living classroom experi­ment. Our purpose is not to highlight one program, camera, or other piece of hard­ware against its competition.

To the contrary, we wanted to bring to­gether the technologi­cal marvels of our time with the trained eye of journalists using cam­eras. Only by explor­ing technology will we learn how best to use the computer software and hardware that have greatly influenced our newsrooms.

Readers need to !mow of the almost superhuman efforts undertaken by both vendors and participants to publish this newspaper, and the great sense of pride in attempting to capture images that communicate information.. Despite the lure of the hardware and software, the primary purpose of the pages produced here was to communicate.

…

Content was our overall goal. Content married with technology.

There are some other articles that are worth a historical read.

Social Contract with Readers, 1978

The American Society of Newspaper Editors asked Ruth Clark to look at the issues between readers and editors.  She refers to this as the “new social contract.” The study, done in 1978, discussed one of the most important issues, behavior influences and “the changing relationship between readers and their newspapers.”  From the summary:

We know very little about the subtle forces that seem to be weakening the emotional ties of many readers, making newspapers less wanted, less needed or, in extreme cases, resented. Analyzing the chemistry of individual relations is difficult enough; explaining group attitudes is even more challenging.

The present pilot study is an attempt, nevertheless, to provide some preliminary insights into what might be called “The New Social Contract between Newspaper Editors and Readers.” It is an effort to deepen our understanding of findings that have been emerging from major reader surveys of the Newspaper Readership Project.  As a by-product, it is also a demonstration of techniques that editors can use  to establish a direct dialogue with readers and non-readers as part of a continuing search for new ways to increase newspaper reading.

The work was commissioned by the American Society of Newspaper Editors and funded by the Readership Council. It was carried out by Yankelovich, Skelly and White, Inc., under the direction of Ruth Clark.

More that 120 regular readers, occasional readers, and non-readers were interview­ed in informal focus group sessions in 12 different daily newspaper markets, both competitive and non-competitive, chain and non-chain. As a special feature, editors not only observed all the sessions but participated part of the time.