Is the End Near For All Print Newspapers?

By Matt Saler

I was pretty shocked to read the other day that The New York Times publisher, Arthur Sulzberger Jr., said the following words: “We will stop printing the New York Times sometime in the future.” He did not give a specific date to this inevitability but it begs the question… if the most read daily newspaper in the country goes strictly to digital, is it the beginning of the end for print newspapers as we know it?

Clearly, a lot of folks in the media industry were buzzing about this news, as many see digital as the present and future. If the majority of the revenue generated by the Times is from its online revenue, it only makes sense that this would be the direction that they would move toward. Business Insider blogger Henry Blogget conducted some interesting research on the topic and came up with the following numbers:


“We estimate that the NYT currently spends about $200 million a year on its newsroom and generates about $150 million of online revenue. If the paywall is highly successful—attracting, say, 1 million subscribers who pay $100 a year—this will add another $100 million of online subscription revenue (assuming the company doesn't lose ad revenue). With $250 million of revenue, the NYT might be able to sustain newsroom costs of about $100 million.

Now, a $100 million newsroom budget is a HUGE newsroom budget--one that most online publications would kill for. So the New York Times isn't going anywhere. But $100 million is also a lot less than the New York Times's current newsroom budget.

So if Arthur Sulzberger is right that the New York Times will eventually have to stop printing the print paper--and we certainly think he is--his company is likely to have to be restructured.”


As one who enjoys opening up a paper and reading through the news of the day, should I be worried that these days are quickly coming to an end? Stay tuned.

Matt Saler is a Senior Account Executive. He can be reached at matt@maroonpr.com.

Social Media Mistake by Washington Post Columnist

By Stefen Lovelace

It’s a new age for journalism. Every reporter has a Twitter handle and news is distributed to readers instantly. Journalists try to beat the competition on the Internet, Twitter and Facebook rather than in the next day’s newspaper.

This new age comes with a price though. Anything you put out there – whether it be a bylined story, or just a simple tweet – will be read as fact. With so much news, readers have a hard time filtering what’s true and what’s not.

Which brings us to Washington Post columnist Mike Wise. The longtime respected columnist made one of the bigger blunders of his career on Monday.

Wise tweeted that Pittsburgh Steelers quarterback Ben Roethlisberger would be suspended for five games. Roethlisberger currently is suspended for six, but many have speculated that suspension may get reduced. The quarterback is a lightning rod for controversy right now, and diehard football fans are following any and every news item that comes out about him.

The tweet about Roethlisberger by Wise was a lie. He tweeted three times afterwards saying he had sources to back up his claim. All of this was made-up, or “a test” as Wise put it, to show how quick news and false news can spread throughout the internet.

It was a terrible mistake by Wise. I understand what he was trying to prove, but his approach was unthinkable. All a journalist has is his or her word and making up news is a cardinal sin in the journalism profession.

A journalist’s reputation “is on the line with every tweet, for better or worse,” [Columbia University Digital Media Professor Sree] Sreenivasan said. “People have a reasonable expectation that it’s accurate or the best of what you know at the moment.”

Wise was suspended for a month from The Post for his mistake. I think that’s about right, especially considering The Post is one of the most credible and well-respected newspapers in the country. Since social media is still so new, and there’s no real precedent for what to do in this situation, there was clear disagreement as to whether Wise’s punishment was just.

Yet within The Post, there was disagreement about whether the punishment fit the crime. Andrew Alexander, the paper’s ombudsman, wrote on his blog that Mr. Wise was “lucky he wasn’t fired.” Howard Kurtz, the paper’s media writer, wrote in a message on Twitter that the suspension “seems overly harsh to me.”

Twitter is a great resource for journalists and wonderful for spreading news. But this incident once again shows the importance of using caution and thinking before putting something up in the social media universe for the world to see.

Stefen Lovelace is an Associate Account Executive. Contact him at stefen@maroonpr.com.

Personality is Key

By Abby Draper

Recently, a colleague and I attend a social media workshop in DC where we were fortunate to be around some wonderful social media pros. While there were several topics covered, we noticed a theme through the morning. Whether it be advice given from a professional working for a TV or radio outlet, a manager of social media and online accounts, or even a journalist, each representative was adamant about being certain your online face has a personality.

After speaking with the professionals working in television and radio, all stressed the transition to receiving daily news through twitter and facebook. Because both sites are monitored by every news station, it’s imperative that when they report this news, they report it with a personality that varies from other outlets.

The message was the same for those who manage online accounts for their brand and clients. Most of these managers are maintaining several accounts at one time and stressed the importance of making these messages personal, while still selling the update to an appropriate audience. Maintaining a personality for a professional athlete is much different than that of a government official.

Journalists have started to rely on social media platforms as well in helping with what could be timely to cover. The journalists in attendance talked about how they pay more attention to brands with “a personality,” as those brands oftentimes will produce interesting tidbits or twists to stories they’ve already heard.

Adding a personal component to a brand allows for your audience to relate to the information you’re giving them. Whether it be about a product, a placement or an event, if you’re solely going through the motions and mechanically promoting yourself or a brand, your audience will lose interest.

Abby Draper is the Manager of Social Media. Contact her at abby@maroonpr.com

Times of London Creating a Model that needs to be Followed

By John Maroon

A few weeks back one of Britain’s most popular and successful newspapers, The Times, began charging its readers for online content. Yahoo.com reported the story on July 2.

The paper, as well as its sister publication, The Sunday Times, is owned by Rupert Murdoch’s New Corporation. The Wall Street Journal (also owned by Murdoch) and The Financial Times also charge for online content.

I believe this is a necessary and positive step by The Times. The old adage is “you get what you pay for.” It is the truth. Not long ago, and to a lesser extent today, we rely on the news media to be creditable, accurate and serve as a watchdog over our nation. The media is also known as The Fourth Estate for that reason.

As consumers we never expected newspapers to be free when they were still a popular means, so why do we expect information on the internet to be free? It’s simply because we have been conditioned to believe that.

The end result is that our best and brightest are no longer choosing journalism as an occupation. The news gathering agencies cannot pay as well and the quality of coverage continues to slip.

Will this be a challenge and interesting to watch? Absolutely! Is there an option…no. For any business to survive it needs to generate revenue and in order for them to grow they need to hire and retain talent.

For the greater good of our society I hope that all of the major papers in the United States follow the lead of The Times and that we, as a country, understand that there is a price for quality and paying for news means better, more accurate media with higher integrity… which will be great for all of us.

John Maroon is the President of Maroon PR. Contact him at john@maroonpr.com.

The Media's Effect in the Firing of Shirley Sherrod

By Carolyn Maroon

I’m sure just about everyone is familiar with the story about the firing of Shirley Sherrod from the United States Department of Agriculture as Director of Rural Development for Georgia. The firing was based on an edited tape of a speech that Sherrod gave in March to the NAACP, which has stirred up a lot of negative emotions and outrage. The story is largely about the danger of jumping to conclusions and media bias.

It all started with conservative blogger Andrew Breitbart, who posted an edited part of the speech without allegedly viewing the entire speech or doing any investigating or research beforehand. Breitbart has stated that his intent was to bring the speech to the public in an effort to expose the hypocrisy of the NAACP. Breitbart is just the latest example of “journalists” who are reckless, and the end result is a blow to the credibility of journalism - a bad thing for society as a whole.

More and more these days we see media outlets and reporters with agendas and strong political leanings. The media is very powerful and reporting the news in a slanted fashion can be dangerous if we blindly believe what we read or listen to without thinking for ourselves and asking questions.

You think this is an exaggeration? Let’s see… a woman was fired from her job after a media member posted an edited tape in which this woman appeared to be making racist comments. The woman’s employer didn’t do an internal investigation as to the origin or legitimacy of the story. The employer didn’t even give the employee an opportunity to tell her side of the story. Since the woman was employed by a government agency this story is national news, and today the USDA along with the Obama administration is taking a hit for not thinking for themselves and asking questions. They simply believed what the media reported.

The lesson I took away from all of this is that we need to continue to monitor the press and look at all stories with a more thoughtful eye before we jump to conclusions or trust the reports on both sides of the political aisle.

Carolyn Maroon is Maroon PR's Office Manager. Contact her at carolyn@maroonpr.com.

AP and ESPN Both Facing Competition

By John Maroon

It appears that cable news giant CNN may be preparing to take on AP and become a subscription based wire news service. They recently ended their subscription with AP and there is speculation abound.

There are many wire services out there, AFP being the largest, but most of them are industry specific (Bloomberg Business Wire). Other wire services have yet to grab a huge market share nationally or are tied to specific news-gathering agencies (Knight Ridder/Tribune and LA Times-Washington Post).

Having an additional international wire service in the market can only be a good thing. Competition is healthy and it would give businesses that use these services more options, while preventing a news gathering agency from dictating the news.

Along the same lines, there has been talk that the sports network Versus is getting poised to challenge ESPN in the all-sports network arena. While this seems like a monumental task, remember that the merger between Comcast (who owns Versus) and NBC would give Versus the power to be promoted through a network much the way ABC promotes ESPN broadcasts. Again, this would be healthy for the industry. Currently, like it or not, ESPN dictates what is news in the world of sports and having another loud voice to provide balance is all good.

John Maroon is the President of Maroon PR. He can be contacted at john@maroonpr.com.

Wall Street Journal Launches New York Section

By Stefen Lovelace

We have an official newspaper war.

On Monday, print heavyweight The Wall Street Journal unveiled its new “Greater New York” section. The section is being seen as a direct competitor to The New York Times, which has been New York’s top publication for local and regional news for years.


Taking over the grand ballroom of The Plaza Hotel in Manhattan, the Journal feted dozens of guests with a breakfast of bagels, quiche, coffee, Danish and other goodies. Large screens in the room promoted the new section's name, while top guns Les Hinton, CEO; Robert Thomson, managing editor; and Michael Rooney, chief revenue officer, headlined the event.

Each spoke out about why this venture, which many analysts and newspaper experts have said is financially limited, will succeed.

"This is good news for New York and good business for Dow Jones," Hinton told the crowd, adding that, in terms of advertising, "We didn't expect it to be as good as it has been."


This move shows that Rupert Murdoch’s News Corp., which purchased the Journal in 2007, believes he can take down one of print’s most well-respected institutions.

There's a reason for his confidence. Earlier this week it was revealed that overall newspaper circulation has continued to declined, down 8.7 percent in a six month period ending March 31, 2010. That news in itself isn't all that surprising.

What is surprising is that The Wall Street Journal is the only one of the top 25 newspapers to rise in total circulation, going up by a very slight 0.5 percent. WSJ is also the No. 1 biggest daily newspaper in the country.

It’s too early to tell what type of effect the Journal’s jump into the New York news scene will have in the city. There have already been some that have ranked and compared the Journal against the Times, with reviews on WSJ's new section being mixed.

NYT hasn’t sat on its hands in this fight, as it’s now being reported that the newspaper is considering expanding its news coverage to include non-New York markets.


The Financial Times is reporting that the NYT has entered discussions to expand to provide regional coverage in five areas of the U.S. Eventually, the paper wants to provide local news for 10 to 15 markets, the FT reports.

It's possible that the paper's enhanced regional coverage is a response to the Journal and fellow News Corp. paper The New York Post's aggressive slashing of ad rates, a move widely perceived as an effort to eat into the Times' ad-client base.


It’ll be interesting to see how this plays out, as the Times and WSJ are two of the largest and most reputable publications in the country. Stay tuned.

Stefen Lovelace is an Associate Account Executive. Contact him at stefen@maroonpr.com.

Old Media vs. New Media Hits Penn State

By Stefen Lovelace

The tug of war between the old-guard, traditional journalism and new-school journalism, which embraces social media, has been ongoing. We’ve talked at length about some of the traditional media’s cautiousness about fully embracing social media before. It looks like the war is even moving to colleges. According to Mashable.com, there’s a bit of a journalism battle going on at Penn State between The Daily Collegian, the long-standing, award-winning student newspaper and a new upstart blog, Onward State.


On the campus of Penn State University, a rivalry between a rogue campus blog and the official newspaper has become a fascinating mirror of the strife between old and new media. In only a matter of months, the unofficial campus blog Onward State, has marshaled the power of social media to compete with the award winning 112-year-old campus paper The Daily Collegian. With one-tenth of the Collegian’s staff size, Onward State has constructed a virtual newsroom that collaborates in real-time with Google Wave, outsourced its tip-line to Twitter, and is unabashed about linking to a competitor’s story.


Full disclosure time. I’m a Penn State grad, and actually worked for The Collegian. I learned a lot from my time working for the student newspaper, and worked with some very talented people while there. I view The Collegian as one of the best student newspapers in the country.
I do find Onward State to be a very interesting alternative though. It’s clear that social media enhances journalism, and it looks like Onward State is fully embracing social media as a way to compete with The Collegian’s larger staff, and more experienced reporters.


“We focused on our Twitter presence from the very beginning, and it’s paid dividends for us in terms of referring traffic to the site and really becoming a part of the community,” said Davis Shaver, founder of Onward State. Tapping the power of the crowd has been essential to multiplying the resources of Onward State’s relatively tiny news team. By being responsive to the social media community, Shaver told Mashable that they “curated this ecosystem in the sense that people will actually send stories to us on Twitter.”


This is in stark contrast to The Collegian, which utilizes social media only for “getting out short bursts of information.”

Onward State also has no qualms about linking to Collegian stories if the Collegian breaks the story first. This is common practice in the digital age, as bloggers have been doing this for years. Not surprisingly, The Collegian is against this practice as they believe it drives traffic to competitors.

I certainly see The Collegian’s concern, but don’t completely agree. With the immediacy that news is broken, it’s time to stop getting fixated on who beats who to stories, and get news out as quickly as possible. Like it or not, that’s the news world we live in.

Another creative advantage Onward State is taking is utilizing Google Wave.


“Our office really consists of my dorm room, I guess. We don’t have any kind of physical structure, so we use [Google] Wave as our virtual newsroom,” said Shaver. Throughout the day, Shaver and his team monitor several waves at once, each tailored for a different department. In a single browser tab, Shaver has a unique eagle’s-eye view of the entire newsroom. In real-time, his editorial team can toggle between multiple conversations or throw an idea out to the crowd for greater perspective.


I must admit, I like what Onward State is doing. I still believe that the best journalism is coming from The Collegian and should be a must-read for every student on campus. But for a small upstart website to compete, utilizing social media is a great way to do this.

This is also an interesting example of the differences between old media and new media, and I’ll be interested to see how this competition plays out.

The story is a fascinating read, and I’d encourage all to check it out HERE.

Stefen Lovelace is an Associate Account Executive. Contact him at stefen@maroonpr.com.

Reuters Journalists Can't Break News on Twitter

By Stefen Lovelace

Last week, Mashable.com reported on an interesting decision by the brass at Reuters. The UK-based news service has forbid their journalists from breaking news on Twitter before releasing the story on the wire first.



The strict instruction makes it clear that even though news continually breaks on Twitter first – especially in disaster scenarios – Reuters journalists are to break their stories first via the wire and not Twitter.


I found this to be a very odd decision on Reuters’ part. I admit I was skeptical of the Twitter phenomenon when it first became popular, and as an ex-journalist, I certainly saw the dangers of using it as a legitimate news breaking service. But after using Twitter for some time now, I see that its pros far outweigh its cons when it comes to breaking news.

What’s nice about Twitter is that as soon as news happens, journalists have the luxury of getting it out to their readers immediately. Since there are only 140 characters to work with, they can stick to just stating the most important fact, while working on a longer story with all of the details. When that story is complete, they can use Twitter to drive traffic to their full story.

If anything, Twitter should be viewed as a valuable tool for journalists and used accordingly. By forcing their journalists to break news on the wire first, Reuters is giving them an incredible disadvantage against the competition. Do you think a Reuters’ journalist will be able to write a wire story faster than a CNN or MSNBC journalist can tweet about it?

Judging by the story, it seems like Reuters has issues with social media as a whole.


…journalists are advised to get manager approval before using Twitter for professional purposes, have someone double-check their tweets before posting, avoid disclosing personal biases (especially political), and to separate professional and private activity with separate accounts.

The policy as a whole is a fascinating read and exposes that Reuters, as a media organization, is torn between encouraging employees to use social media and the realization that the online behaviors of their staff put them at risk, a sentiment expressed in the comment that these tools, if misused, could “threaten our hard-earned reputation for independence and freedom from bias or our brand.”


It’s no secret that you have to be careful with everything you post using social media. But Reuters’ journalists are trained professionals. If they’re working at a news organization as well-respected as Reuters, I’d like to think they know the importance of using discretion and eliminating their own personal biases.

The most important thing to take from this new policy, Mashable.com addresses in the last sentence of the story:


As other news organizations, reputable or not, continue to break stories on Twitter and even mandate social media usage, it will be interesting to see whether or not Reuters can maintain their relevance and position atop the news chain.


Without embracing social media, it’s hard to believe Reuters will be able to.

Stefen Lovelace is an Associate Account Executive. Contact him at stefen@maroonpr.com.

Athletes Becoming Reporters: the Ochocinco News Network

Author: Stefen Lovelace

Date: Wednesday, February 3, 2010

Super Bowl week is one of the biggest sports media events of the year. Reporters from outlets all over the country have been flocking to Miami this week for America's most high-profile game.

When the NFL goes over its long list of requests for media credentials, there will be four names that should immediately pop out. NFL players Chad Ochocinco, Chris Cooley, Ray Rice and Darnell Dockett are in Miami, reporting on the Super Bowl, for the "Ochocinco News Network." (OCNN)

Chad Ochocinco and other prominent NFL players will be asking the questions and giving reports during Super Bowl week.

The media-savvy Bengals receiver plans to attend news conferences and parties leading up to the title game in Miami, gathering insights from coaches, players and celebrities for his array of social networks.

As much as this seems like your standard publicity stunt by Ochocinco - the enigmatic Cincinnati Bengals reciever who is as famous for his touchdown celebrations than his actual production on the field - it seems that this network is legitimate. Not only have the four athletes been filing reports; they've also been doing the social media marketing that has become so vital to journalism.

Ochocinco and his three helpers plan to function as reporters, updating a Web site and a Twitter feed during the week. The players have hundreds of thousands of regular followers on their personal Twitter accounts and other social network platforms.

They expect to attend media sessions where players and coaches are available, conduct interviews with guests at the media headquarters, and provide behind-the-scenes glimpses at the nightly Super Bowl parties in Miami.

During yesterday's media session, Ochocinco's lack of reporting experience clearly showed, when he couldn't get a question in to Indianapolis Colts quarterback Peyton Manning during a 45 minute interview session. He tried, but was cut off by other reporters accustomed to having to get their questions in loudly and quickly.

Still, if anyone can pull this off, athletes like Ochocinco and Cooley would be logical choices. Both are incredibly engaged to their fans and know what type of information draws eyes and attention.

It remains to be seen what type of success this network will have and if fans really want their news from athletes with little reporting experience. At the very least, it's an interesting test-model for this type of reporting in the future.

To check out OCNN, go to www.motorola.com/ocnn.

Stefen Lovelace is an Associate Account Executive. Contact him at stefen@maroonpr.com.

Newsday Pay Wall Having Limited Success

Author: Stefen Lovelace

Date: Thursday, January 28, 2010

I wrote a blog last week that detailed The New York Times strategy to start charging its subscribers to read NYTimes.com stories. In that post, I mentioned that many other newspapers would be watching to see what type of success The Times has doing this, as it could show whether online readers would be willing to pay for something that they were used to getting for free.

In October 2009, Newsday - a Long Island daily newspaper that has a top-12 national circulation - put Newsday.com behind a pay wall. According to The New York Observer, the number of subscribers to Newsday.com after three months is remarkably low.

So, three months later, how many people have signed up to pay $5 a week, or $260 a year, to get unfettered access to newsday.com?

The answer: 35 people. As in fewer than three dozen. As in a decent-sized elementary-school class.

That astoundingly low figure was revealed in a newsroom-wide meeting last week by publisher Terry Jimenez when a reporter asked how many people had signed up for the site. Mr. Jimenez didn't know the number off the top of his head, so he asked a deputy sitting near him. He replied 35.

According to the story, web traffic to Newsday.com has seen a sizable hit. In October, Newsday.com got 2.2 million unique visits. In December, just 1.5 million. Page visits normally equal advertising dollars, so the switch to a pay model may ultimately do much more harm to the bottom line than good.

What this means for The New York Times isn’t yet clear. The Times is much more of a national newspaper, so it’s possible that its far-reaching audience will be more willing to pay for the paper’s content. And not to take anything away from Newsday, but The Times is known for having some of the best reporting and stories of any newspaper in the country.

Still, I would have to think that The Times is paying very close attention to what ramifications Newsday will see from forcing online readers to pay.

I ended my New York Times post by asking how much true journalism was really worth.

Apparently not that much.

Stefen Lovelace is an Associate Account Executive. You can contact him at stefen@maroonpr.com.

The Sad Rantings of Paul Shirley

Author: John Maroon

Date: Wednesday, January 27, 2010

Paul Shirley is a former professional basketball player, and has also blogged and written for various websites, including ESPN.com

Yesterday a “journalist” named Paul Shirley wrote a column where he said that he would not donate to the Haiti relief effort and wondered why anyone would.

I invite you to read the entire article and form your own opinion, but essentially, he said that he cannot understand why no one has admonished Haiti the country for being structured in such a way that it would be destroyed completely by this earthquake.

One of the most hurtful passages from Shirley’s column:

Dear Haitians –

First of all, kudos on developing the poorest country in the Western Hemisphere. Your commitment to human rights, infrastructure, and birth control should be applauded.

As we prepare to assist you in this difficult time, a polite request: If it’s possible, could you not re-build your island home in the image of its predecessor? Could you not resort to the creation of flimsy shanty- and shack-towns? And could some of you maybe use a condom once in a while?

Sincerely,

The Rest of the World

I’ve heard some people question the Haitian government and its lack of effort to help its country improve. It is the poorest country in the hemisphere and has been so for quite some time.

That said, at this time that issue is completely irrelevant. That is something that should and will be dealt with down the line when the country and its citizens are back on their collective feet. Currently we have over 100,000 people dead and 10s of thousands missing. What we should do, what we always do and what we have done as Americans is step up.

The outpour of support has truly made me proud to be an American. It doesn’t matter how much you make, what you believe, or how you identify yourself; everyone has stepped up in some way to help. This has led to hundreds of millions of dollars in donations, volunteerism, and meaningful and necessary deployment of our military personnel.

Now is not the time to stand on some imaginary pedestal and point out Haiti’s flaws. Now is the time to help. Sometimes we forget just how lucky we are to live in the United States, a country that allows us every opportunity to elect our officials, make our way in the world and determine our own fate.

As an American I am very proud of our country and so proud that in times like this we have shown to be the most caring and generous nation in the world. The way we have answered the bell, yet again, is another reason to be proud of this country.

Mr. Shirley, I live by the creed that if you can give to someone in pain, someone in need, or someone who is suffering; you should do so. No questions asked and no recognition sought. Many others share this viewpoint. For whatever reason, you don’t seem to feel the same way.

We don’t need columns admonishing Haiti and the Haitian people.

We need to help save lives.

John Maroon is the President of Maroon PR. Contact him at john@maroonpr.com.

You can donate to help Haiti by visiting the Red Cross or Unicef, by clicking the links.

The Pros & Cons of Having No Barriers To Entry

Author: John Maroon

Date: Thursday, January 21, 2010

The Mark McGwire admission to using performance enhancing drugs (PEDs) for 10 years has obviously been a huge story and has rekindled the steroids in baseball discussion. Overall these revelations and this discussion is a good thing, however, there is a downside.

With anyone and everyone having a blog these days there has been some very irresponsible postings. Everyone is now ready to pass judgment on a number of athletes and accuse them of using PEDs despite the fact that there is zero evidence indicating such use. Primarily, I am speaking about my client and friend Cal Ripken, Jr.

There have been several recent blogs that have suggested that Cal may have used PEDs. These blogs are run by some who are supposed to be credible like Dan Le Batard of The Miami Herald but many who simply consider themselves experts because they like baseball (or hate baseball) and they have an opinion.

The thing that these bloggers don’t keep in mind or don’t care about is that this is hateful, hurtful and based on nothing. Cal has stated time and again that he never used steroids, he never got larger late in his career or hit a crazy amount of home runs, etc.

Athletes like Cal Ripken and Derek Jeter should be celebrated now more than ever not looked at with suspicion because some guy with a computer has an uninformed opinion. And there is the problem. There is no barrier to entry anymore. You used to have to be a part of a legitimate news gathering agency to be heard around the world and now you just need a computer and some time.

Overall the world of social media and blogs has been a wonderful thing. But there is a downside, and that is a lack of accountability and no barrier to entry.

John Maroon is the President of Maroon PR. Contact him at john@maroonpr.com.

(Photo Courtesy of Sports Illustrated)

It’s Time to Talk About the Past: Mark McGwire’s Steroid Admission & Media Strategy

Author: Tim Richardson

Date: Wednesday, January 20, 2010

Last week, former Major League Baseball player Mark McGwire admitted he used performance enhancing drugs during his career. The admission by the onetime single-season homerun leader did not surprise many as there had been a cloud of speculation surrounding the subject for over a decade. Rather, it is the manner in which “Big Mac” chose for coming clean and his statements about steroids having no effect on his performance that have drawn the most scrutiny, especially in the public relations industry and by the media, which The SportsBusiness Daily's Erik Swanson wrote about earlier this week.

We are a society that loves to forgive our athletes and celebrities. We want them to tell us they are sorry, make us believe in their contrition and choose to give them another chance. The owner of the top selling jersey in the NBA, Los Angeles Lakers’ guard Kobe Bryant, and 2010 Golden Globe winning actor Robert Downey, Jr. validate that point.

And when they apologize to us, we don’t want to just see statements on Internet sites (yes, we’re talking to you Tiger Woods) or a press conference where they read a prepared statement. A true apology comes from the heart, not a typed sheet of paper.

All that being said, McGwire coming forward on the issue was the right thing to do, especially as he prepares to return to MLB this year as the St. Louis Cardinals’ hitting instructor. Without this admission, spring training would have been a media circus and he would have been a huge distraction to the team. Questions will still arise in camp, but the amount will be greatly diminished now that McGwire has spoken about his steroid use.

Once he made the decision to speak, it was imperative to develop a plan for how and where the message would best be delivered. According to The New York Times, McGwire hired former White House Press Secretary Ari Fleischer to help him to do just that. The strategy involved exclusively breaking the news with an Associated Press (AP) story, followed that evening by a sit-down television interview with Bob Costas on MLB Network.

Considering the magnitude of the story and its far reaching appeal, many public relations professionals argue that breaking the story with the AP made sense. However, the case exists that McGwire’s strategy may have been better suited to also include The St. Louis Post Dispatch. This outlet was the local paper covering him during the latter part of his controversial career as a player, and is the hometown paper for where McGwire is now employed. Media feeds off media, and in today’s instant news and Internet-driven world, the print story would have garnered similar coverage and generated stories in other mediums, while taking care of a key local media outlet in the market where McGwire played and will coach. In our day and age there is no such thing as “local” press… everything is instantly shared via social media and the internet. I am guessing that the St. Louis media felt slighted by McGwire, and for good reason.

At Maroon PR, we always stress to our clients that it’s important to never forget or overlook the media where they live, work, run their business, etc. For example, when Cal Ripken broke Lou Gehrig’s consecutive games played record and when he was selected to the National Baseball Hall of Fame, he carved out time for each of the local networks in Baltimore and Washington, DC. When Team USA forward Carmelo Anthony won a gold medal at the 2008 summer Olympics, he returned to his hometown of Baltimore to meet with the media and discuss the achievement.

The second part of McGwire’s strategy was granting the first television interview to Costas. The SportsBusiness Daily cited a source close to the strategy as saying Costas would have been the first choice, regardless of the network for which he worked. Nonetheless, MLB Network getting the interview was a major land for the young, league-owned network and the choice of Costas as the interviewer was a good one by McGwire’s team.

Costas himself has practically become a brand. From anchoring NBC’s Olympic and Sunday Night Football coverage, to his MLB Network show and previous experience with HBO, he’s well respected as a journalist and provided McGwire with a credible avenue for his admission. Choosing a person they knew would serve “softball” questions and not probe McGwire would have been ineffective. You may recall that many in the media felt ESPN’s Peter Gammons (now at MLB Network by the way) was too easy on Yankees third baseman Alex Rodriguez during their television one-on-one in February 2009 when he admitted to taking steroids. But Costas’ questioning of McGwire was determined and inquisitive, while not attacking. Public perception of the validity of McGwire’s admission is also aided when the audience believes the interviewer is reliable and legitimate. Another example of someone who did this effectively is Michael Vick when he sat down with James Brown for a 60 Minutes interview prior to his return to the NFL after a dog-fighting scandal and prison term.

Managing the distribution and ensuring the message was delivered effectively were the two key pieces of the strategy regarding McGwire’s admission. Therefore, a press conference would not have been the appropriate strategy. Between the massive amount of media who would converge on the event and the format a press conference provides, it would have been impossible for the “human element” of the story to be conveyed.

Moving away from the strategy, McGwire made some critical missteps during the interview itself. He did appear emotional, repeatedly said he was sorry and apologized to the people he “let down.” However, his insistence that his records were “completely legit” and that his hand-eye coordination and God-given ability were not aided by his use of PEDs was a mistake. If you are going to apologize, go the whole way. Don’t diminish your remorse by saying injuries made you do steroids and that your performance wasn’t impacted by their use. Through these statements, and his mention of the Hall of Fame, McGwire diminished his contriteness and missed a golden opportunity to get everything out in the open and truly move on from the subject.

Tim Richardson is the Executive Vice President of Maroon PR and oversees the Sports & Entertainment Division. You can contact him at tim@maroonpr.com.

NYTimes.com to Start Charging for Online Content

Author: Stefen Lovelace

Date: Monday, January 18, 2010

In August 2009, David Simon – the creator of the critically acclaimed HBO television show “The Wire,” top-selling author, and former reporter for The Baltimore Sun – penned a story for the Columbia Journalism Review that urged newspapers to make a major change in how readers access their online articles.

Simon urged The New York Times and The Washington Post, two of the biggest and most well-respected newspapers in the country, to start charging for their online content. He was one of the most vocal in defending the value of true, long-form journalism, and has argued that newspapers giving away their product for free will just continue to lead to plummeting circulation and advertising dollars. This cycle will eventually lead to newspaper’s ultimate demise.

For the past year, The Times has wrestled with the idea of going to some form of a pay site. NYTimes.com is one of the most popular websites on the internet, but their online advertising didn’t result in a big enough profit for The Times company.

It was reported yesterday by NYMag.com that The Times may have finally decided on a way to make readers pay for content.

New York Times Chairman Arthur Sulzberger Jr. appears close to announcing that the paper will begin charging for access to its website, according to people familiar with internal deliberations. After a year of sometimes fraught debate inside the paper, the choice for some time has been between a Wall Street Journal-type pay wall and the metered system adopted by the Financial Times, in which readers can sample a certain number of free articles before being asked to subscribe. The Times seems to have settled on the metered system.

If this does occur, it could have a major ripple effect in the newspaper industry. Every newspaper around the country will be watching The Times to see if this works, as the major argument against having pay sites is whether readers would be willing to pay for something that they’re so used to getting for free.

The final decision could come this week, with a formal announcement to come within the next few weeks. According to the story, The Times wouldn’t start charging for content for months (perhaps starting in the spring).

The decision to go to a pay-site was not an easy one. Top-level employees at The Times had been debating the decision for the last year, with those that advocated to stay free citing the growth of the website, and the possibility of big profit coming in the future from web advertising.

The argument for remaining free was based on the belief that nytimes.com is growing into an English-language global newspaper of record, with a vast audience — 20 million unique readers — that, [Times digital chief Martin] Nisenholtz and others believed, would prove lucrative as web advertising matured. (The nytimes.com homepage, for example, has sold out on numerous occasions in the past year.) As other papers failed to survive the massive migration to the web, the Times would be the last man standing and emerge with even more readers. Going paid would capture more circulation revenue, but risk losing significant traffic and with it ad dollars. At an investor conference this fall, Nisenholtz alluded to this tension: "At the end of the day, if we don't get this right, a lot of money falls out of the system."

Nisenholtz’s argument certainly has tremendous merit, and if the pay-site idea fails, it may be difficult to earn back a lot of the readers that NYTimes.com currently gets. The huge declines in advertising from the recession last year put pressure on the newspaper to act now with their pay idea or risk even more profit declines that they wouldn't be able to withstand.

Simon and others in favor of newspapers charging for their content ultimately got their wish and now we’ll see what impact this will have on the industry. With so many people used to getting online newspaper content for free – like readers, bloggers, online news sites, etc. – will those people be willing to pay for the written word?

At the very least, this model may help to answer the question: How much is true journalism really worth?

Stefen Lovelace is an Associate Account Executive. You can contact him at stefen@maroonpr.com.