February 24, 2021 • 51 mins
Long before the pandemic, there were those who were writing the death of the modern American newspaper. With the rise of the internet and social media, news commentary has gained dominance to achieve likes and ratings to attract advertising dollars, while local newspapers have consolidated into widespread regional hubs as subscriptions have dwindled. This week we're exploring the future of journalism and the media - news versus news commentary, press release journalism versus investigative reporting, finding fact in the world of "fake news" and "alternative facts," and what that all means for local news.
This week's episode features Barry Rothfeld, Retired, President and Publisher at The Poughkeepsie Journal, former editor and journalist.
Mark as Played
Transcript
Episode Transcript
Available transcripts are automatically generated. Complete accuracy is not guaranteed.
Speaker 1 (00:03):
We are experiencing a paradigm shift, a fundamental
change in the way we usually dothings.
We are intentionally choosing tosee the silver lining
opportunity arises.
We can shine a light on thethings that weren't working well
(00:25):
on those things that weren'treally working at all, we can
regroup reevaluate andre-engineer it's time to explore
new patterns and paradigms thosethat inspire us to rise above
the chaos and explore how theconditions of today and take us
(00:47):
to a better tomorrow patternsand paradigms the pattern
podcast from Hudson Valleypattern for progress.
You're listening to season two,episode eight, fake news versus
fact-based journalism with yourhost pattern, president and CEO,
Jonathan Dropkin.
Speaker 2 (01:07):
Hi everyone, and welcome to patterns and
paradigms.
We hope you enjoy the discussionwe had last week with Mecca
Mitchell, the senior vicepresident for diversity
inclusion and communityengagement, as well as the chief
diversity officer forWestchester medical center.
(01:27):
Please remember to subscribe toour podcast and take a moment to
share an episode with a friendbubble or trend the weather in
Texas.
I certainly hope that the stormlast week is not a trend like
everything else in the UnitedStates.
(01:48):
Why shouldn't a winter storm bepolarizing.
The entire state loses itselectricity, but in the rush to
blame someone, you could choosea severe storm that challenged a
self-contained electric gridthat was not made for severe
weather, or you could blame thefact that some of the energy
(02:12):
that Texas produces comes fromgreen energy, wind turbines and
solar rays.
We can only hope that the desireto blame alternative energy is
the bubble and that the trend isto seek more comprehensive,
integrated, and innovative waysof addressing energy needs is
(02:32):
the trend, but Hey, it's Texas.
So whether there is a bubble ora trend, well, let's just say
that if in the midst of theimpact of one of the most severe
storms in the state's history,one of its U S senators decides
it's time to head to Cancun.
(02:53):
Well, it is part of a trend, butnot the kind we just described
before I introduce our guests.
Let me ask my partner atpattern, Joe Chakka what's up,
Joe, how you doing Joe?
Speaker 3 (03:11):
Pretty well surviving another storm up this way.
Speaker 2 (03:14):
It's just incredible.
It just doesn't stop snowing.
I always thought this was like abad Stephen King book.
What's happening this week at,Hey, we're working pretty hard
on putting the class togetherfor our community Rebuilders
program where I think what we'reit, Joe, it's a takeoff on
(03:34):
something you and I created acouple of years ago called
community builders, where wework with people on an idea that
they may have for theircommunity and try to take it to
a full blown plan for a project.
Speaker 3 (03:49):
Yeah, it's hard to believe five years ago, you and
I came up with this brain brainchild of an idea of creating the
community builders and it workedout pretty well.
We had two years worth ofclasses and we had anywhere
between six and eight, uh, youknow, professionals, uh, go
through the course and they tooka project and we tried to help
(04:12):
them make it come to fruition.
And we had a couple of reallygood successes downtown
Middletown Garnerville artscenter, uh, the Ritz theater.
So it was a very, very valuableprogram.
I think that a lot of people gotgotten a lot of good information
out of and, and their projectsdid well.
So, you know, last year we werethinking about doing the class
(04:35):
again and with all of the thingsgoing on with the pandemic we
thought, are we really buildinga community?
Or as you said, are werebuilding the community?
And I think the rebuilding fitsvery well.
So last week we had aninformation session on the
upcoming class and we hadsomewhere around 60 or 65 people
(05:00):
register for the informationcenter.
We had 40 and attendance, whichwas great.
And because the others couldn'tattend last week, we decided
this week, we're going to run itagain.
And so on Wednesday, February24th, at 5:00 PM, you can tune
into the community Rebuildersinformation session to learn
(05:21):
more about this year's class,which is going to start in April
run through June.
It's very much a fast moving, uh, bootcamp style, uh, community
development project and ourprogram and, uh, applications
will be due March 1st
Speaker 2 (05:40):
Well.
And I think we're, we're tryingto limit the size of the class
to ensure that, uh, patternstaff can give the participants
the kind of attention they needin developing their projects.
So I think our goal is to reallyhave only 10.
And I think there's only just,you know, two or three slots
left.
That's correct.
Speaker 3 (05:58):
Uh, you know, B, if we go beyond 10 people, then
we've, we think that we can'tgive the focus and the attention
on the projects that, that theydeserve.
Um, and it's going to be veryintensive, both for the
participants and for our ownstaff, because we always take
things and make them our own, ifyou will.
And, and when we do this, we putmore time in than we probably
(06:22):
should on some of these projectsbecause we just like them so
much and we want to see ourcommunity to advance
Speaker 2 (06:28):
Well.
And I think that you've hit iton the head, Joe, that, you
know, if someone comes to thepattern with an idea and we
think we can help them, then wekind of adopt it and we want it
to come to fruition.
And there's been a lot ofprojects that we've been
involved in over the years thatwe feel just that way,
(06:49):
everything else going on.
Speaker 3 (06:51):
Well, funny, you should ask tune into our YouTube
channel, go to our website, andyou'll be able to find the event
for this month's housing webinarand is focusing on the
moratorium on evictions.
We have an all-star panel that,that we did a prerecording on.
Um, and we're talking to, um,advocates, we're talking to, uh,
(07:13):
lenders and affordable housing.
And I was talking to legalservices and really trying to
hit every side of the evictionissue.
Uh, both of what's going on now.
And unfortunately what'sprobably coming down the line in
four, six, maybe eight months.
There's going to be a heck of acrisis that we're going to be
facing.
(07:33):
Um, and this webinar reallycovers a lot of those issues.
Speaker 2 (07:37):
The eviction crisis is the fact that people have not
been able to make their rentpayments landlords on the other
side, do need money in order tomaintain their properties.
So this is really an importantthing
Speaker 3 (07:52):
It is.
And, you know, in, in short, I'dlike to say that the rent crisis
for people not paying iscritical to the landlord.
Obviously it's critical to thetenant because you know that,
and that's why the eviction isthere.
You know, nobody wants to getkicked out on the street.
And so, you know, the, the, themoratorium itself is important
(08:18):
because it does stop theeviction.
But as we all say in thisbusiness, the rent does come
due.
And that's the big problem isthat there may be some tenants
that are four, six, 10, 12months behind in rent, and how
do they make up those kinds ofarrears?
And so some of the guests aretalking about some other rent
(08:39):
relief programs.
Um, and again, our legalservices representative, um, is
talking about, you know, takingcare of some issues where there
may be some unscrupulouslandlords, uh, in the business,
Joe, thanks a lot for takingissue on,
Speaker 2 (08:56):
And, and it's going to be enormous as this, uh, as
we come out of the pandemic andthe expectation is people need
to pay their rent.
So, um, a lot going on here atpattern.
Thanks, Joe.
Thank you today.
We're going to be talking withBarry Rothfeld.
Barry has had a long anddistinguished career in
(09:18):
journalism from reporter toeditor to publisher.
Barry has been in probably everyposition in the print media
world.
He has chaired the New Yorknewspaper publisher associations
board of directors, and as bothexecutive editor and publisher
(09:39):
of the Poughkeepsie journal herein Duchess County is well versed
on the issues facing the HudsonValley.
Hi, Barry, good to have you onpatterns and paradigms, how you
doing, and it sure seems likejudging by our zoom call.
You're not looking at snow rightnow.
Speaker 4 (10:00):
No, Jonathan, first of all, thanks for having me.
It's great to see you, eventhough we're 1200 miles apart or
so I'm actually here in sunny,Florida.
And, um, I could tell you that Icould join the chamber of
commerce if I had to.
Speaker 2 (10:16):
And, and how have you managed through the pandemic?
Have you been down in Florida orwhere, you know,
Speaker 4 (10:24):
W we've been, we've been down here since February
1st, so, and, um, other thanthat, we've been just like
everyone else.
We've been hunkered down inHopewell junction, New York, and
, uh, managing our way throughit, wearing our masks
religiously.
Are we now double mask?
Even, even though we did get ourfirst vaccination, uh, but we
(10:49):
still take it very, verycarefully.
We haven't eaten inside arestaurant yet.
Um, we basically bring foodhome.
We eaten outside the restaurantwhere we've been comfortable
that the tables were far enoughapart.
And, uh, even if we get oursecond vaccination, I think
we're going to be doing thatsame thing just to be extra
(11:09):
careful.
Speaker 2 (11:09):
Cool.
And I think this is going to allof 20, 21.
There's going to be some aspectof this pandemic.
That's going to be with us.
So, you know, Barry, I've knownyou since you've been, uh,
you've been a publisher you'vetold me about, you know, parts
of your career in, in stateorganizations in the media.
(11:30):
Um, but why don't for ourlisteners?
Why don't you briefly walkthrough your bio and tell us
your career, which makes it, itwill make it clear to our
listeners why I asked you tojoin me on this topic?
Speaker 4 (11:46):
Well, thanks.
Um, well, I wasn't always thepublisher.
I wasn't always on the businessside of the, a medium sized
business.
I started as a reporteractually.
Um, you know, I, um, back incollege I was editor of my
college paper.
Um, and, um, we're not toColumbia journalism school and
(12:07):
that a job would get net rightout of college at the port
Chester daily item inWestchester.
Um, and I stayed in Westchesterfor 17 years in various, uh,
reporting and editing roles andbecame senior managing editor
down there.
Um, and it was a greatopportunity, great learning
environment, good journalism.
(12:30):
And I always credit thatopportunity in that environment
with my love for communityjournalism and my belief that,
um, you know, local journalismwas sort of where it's at in
terms of the impact we can haveon our communities in 90.
I got the opportunity to move upto the Poughkeepsie journal as
the top editor and, um, uh, fellin love with the Mid-Hudson
(12:56):
Valley, um, and, uh, alwaysvowed that it would be my
permanent home, although Ganettehad different, different ideas
for me.
Um, and after, um, three or fouryears transferred me up to
Binghamton New York, um, where Iwas the top editor there.
And, um, a couple of years,three or four years later, um,
(13:18):
the opportunity to become apublisher was presented to me.
And after, so after about 25years in the editorial side of
the business, I considered theoptions and decided to take the
plunge and became publisher atthe Africa journal, um, which is
a great town to live in Ethica,um, four hours from everywhere,
(13:40):
however, um, and in the snowbelt, um, but a great community and
we make great lifelong friends,but I always want them to come
back to Poughkeepsie.
And several years after that job, um, I was, uh, when Dick Waco
was getting ready to retireafter an illustrious career at
the Poughkeepsie journal, I wasgiven the opportunity to come
(14:01):
back to Poughkeepsie where Ialways want them to come back to
and end my career.
And in 20 2004, I came back to,um, the Poughkeepsie journal as
the publisher where, um, youknow, I kind of always wanted to
be, um, I think the transitionfrom editor to publisher was a
(14:22):
natural one for me.
I mean, one of the things thatalways made a great, uh, a great
decision for me is that I stillwas able to keep my hands on the
editorial side of the business.
I also was able to take off someof the restrictions on being on
the edit as being an editor, asI was able to get more involved
in community activities.
(14:43):
Of course, um, you know, Ibecome became very, very active
in a bunch of communityactivities, being, serving on a
number of boards and being chairof a couple of them.
So that was, um, something that,um, was a bonus, some becoming
on the business side of the, ofthe legislative speak.
Speaker 2 (15:05):
So you've been a reporter, you've been an editor,
you've been a publisher.
And I think you've also told methat you were parts of various
state associations that, um, inthe media world.
Speaker 4 (15:20):
Yeah, I was, um, I was a long, a long time, um, uh,
trustee of the New York state,um, newspaper publishers
association.
And I actually was chair of thatboard also for one or two terms.
And, uh, it was, uh, anorganization that also went
through many, many changes asthe business changed.
(15:40):
And I'm sure we're going todiscuss that in the next 35 to
40 minutes as, um, you know,the, the member organizations
throughout the state, um, wentfrom being robust and cash rich
to being less.
So I'll put it like that.
And, uh, you know, and, and, andthey had to do a lot, a lot more
(16:05):
with a lot less
Speaker 2 (16:06):
Long before the pandemic.
There were those who werewriting the death of the modern
American newspaper.
And then, you know, as a resultof social media, where were we
before the pandemic?
Speaker 4 (16:20):
Long before the pandemic, people were talking
about the death of the Americannewspaper, that we were losing
subscribers, that young peopleweren't coming to newspapers,
but, um, I would go toconferences even as a middle
editor, um, and people wouldtalk about the need to attract
the readers because we're notgoing to get the readers that
(16:42):
would be able to support ouradvertising.
But the truth of the matter isright up until the 2008
financial crisis, newspaperswere really, really strong
business operations.
Um, we were able to have enoughreaders to deliver strong
results for our advertisers.
(17:03):
We made good money.
We had very, very strong profitmargins, and we in very, very
good shape at the 2008 financialcrisis not hit, who knows where
we would be, of course, with theadvent of the growth of the
internet.
Um, you could accuse theindustry of really not keeping
(17:25):
up and getting out ahead of thatand becoming, uh, getting on the
digital bandwagon, so to speakquickly enough, and really not
figuring out a way to not onlyattract digital subscribers and
digital readers, but neverreally figuring out a way how to
monetize that.
I hate that word, but that is animportant thing when you're
(17:45):
talking about the business.
So yes, it was, um, it was afactor, um, before the pandemic.
And of course the pandemic issomething that, um, accelerated
a lot of those factors.
Speaker 2 (17:59):
So within the Hudson Valley and just correct me if
I'd characterize this wrong, it,it, it almost feels as if the,
um, newspapers are even beingconsolidated more that the three
prominent go-to newspapers whenI started pattern where the
Poughkeepsie journal, the timesHerald record and the journal
(18:20):
news, but they now appear to bealmost one newspaper frequently
seeing the same story.
They're all owned by Ganette.
I think so help me out if I'vemischaracterized that
Speaker 4 (18:35):
Well, that's true.
Um, we can add is not theGanette that I worked for.
This is the new dinette in 2019Jeanette and Gatehouse merged.
And it was really a takeover by,um, by Gatehouse and it just
adopted the Ganette name.
So it only is Gatehouse who and
Speaker 2 (18:58):
Barry, who is Gatehouse.
Speaker 4 (19:01):
Well, date house was another large, um, media,
newspaper, Cottonelle, largelynewspaper company, um, that, um,
owned a bunch of regionalnewspapers, I think, including
Middletown, they took theGodette name, but the people who
run the new company are all thetop.
(19:23):
People are the Gatehouse.
People continue to consolidateoperations.
So it became a larger and largercompany.
And this happened not only inthe Hudson Valley, but around
the company and the, um, andstaff was cut.
Um, I think in the last fewmonths they made buyout offers
(19:44):
to anyone who would take it.
Um, and so, and I'm not beingcritical of this.
I'm just stating what I know,um, my understanding of what, of
what happened.
And so what they ended up doingis, uh, providing more regional
content.
Um, and, um, the control ofwhite appears tends to be run
(20:10):
out of a, uh, regional hub.
Um, and, um, so that is, youknow, something that is
different than when I ran thepaper out of eight 85 civic
center Plaza, so to speak.
Speaker 2 (20:27):
Absolutely.
And so it's interesting that asthe, the papers that I knew when
I first got to pattern, youknow, 15 years ago, continue to
consolidate, I have this feelingthough, that there is the rise
of the really local paper,either print or online that so
(20:50):
many of the communities in theHudson Valley beacon, or, or
around, uh, Ellenville or, uh,in Sullivan County, the
Democrat, it seems like almosteveryone either has a little
print paper or an online papercovering a tiny geographic area.
Speaker 4 (21:11):
Is that these kind of micro-site, um, operations are,
um, up and running.
I have no idea how theirfinances work or whether they
make any money or not.
But I do know that there are alot of them are out there and,
and beating the bigger boys, twostories on a regular basis.
(21:35):
Um, um, that said, um, I do haveto wonder from a first amendment
point of view, who is out thereproviding the checks and
balances on local government, uh, these days, like we used to do
in the good old days, um, asopposed to what I would call,
(21:58):
um, press-release journalism.
There's a lot of stories outthere that are just basically,
um, rewrites of what's handed toreport is as opposed to people
going to the scenes of, of, um,of, uh, what's happening out
there, or going to meetings, oractually trying to dig through
(22:18):
public records and trying toscratch the surface.
So scratch below the surface tofind out what's really going on.
I mean, there's, there's some ofthat going on at, at, um, at the
cadet paper still is a, youknow, like David McKay, Wilson
is still out there doing reallygood investigative journalism,
but there's not as much of thatgoing on as it was in the days
(22:44):
that, um, you know, backed intothe nineties and early two
thousands as you would see.
And that's one of the thingsthat worries me as, um, vibrant
newspaper operations become farand fewer.
Speaker 2 (23:02):
So I, I think that's a good place to jump off on the
issue of quote unquote fakenews.
It's, it's, you know, it's sadsince, you know, I grew up and I
am old enough to remember whoEdward R Murrow and Walter
(23:24):
Cronkite were in.
And you had this sense that whenit was uttered by Walter
Cronkite on the CBS eveningnews, it was fact it was
checked, it was researched.
And yet the attack on mediabeing fake news, and very much
(23:46):
to your point, the role of themedia as the fourth estate and
being there to challengegovernment at all levels,
whether, you know, we've seen itplay out in Washington or
Poughkeepsie, um, where, whereare we in and how do we ensure
the vitality of the fourthestate?
(24:07):
One question, and the secondquestion, how do we restore
people's confidence?
Speaker 4 (24:14):
Well, let me, let me kind of go back to where I think
this has all come from, and thisis kind of my off the cuff
analysis, for lack of a betterword.
You know, I think it startedwith talk radio back in the, you
know, 20 years ago and itmorphed into what's happened on
cable cable, um, cable, I'llcall it quote unquote news.
(24:42):
Um, you know, and, and over theyears that has become more
fractured and more fractious ina way.
Um, and you know, people don'tgo to these stations to find out
what's happening or to reallyfind out a fair and balanced to
(25:04):
use that term, um, reflection ofwhat's going on out there.
They turn into these stations toreinforce their and beliefs,
right.
And, and, um, and in manyrespects, it's serving to
further divide an alreadydivided country.
And that's very sad and veryscary and how you reverse that.
(25:30):
I'm not sure I had theprescription for that, except
that maybe that there's a leaderout there who will be able to do
that someday.
Um, some, um, hopefully theleader will be someone who can
bring people together as opposedto a leader who will further
divide people.
That's the scary part.
You don't know who that personmight be someday.
(25:52):
Um, you know, there are stillgood broadcasts and, and, um,
and, and re and, and reportersout there who report fairly, but
I don't know that peoplerecognize that anymore.
And, um, and, and that's a sadstate of affairs, but to be
honest with you, because I,people tend to look at things
(26:14):
through their own set of lenses.
And, um, and, and we've, we'vecome this far and reversing that
trend is going to be a very hardthing to do.
Speaker 2 (26:27):
You know, I I've often thought that, you know,
the, the actual reporting, uh,there, uh, let's see if I can
break it down this way and seeif you agree with this.
So like, if you take even thetwo biggest, most trusted
newspapers being, let's say theNew York times and the wall
street journal, that theirreporting is very good up until
(26:55):
you get to the editorial page.
Right.
And the editorial page is got,you know, in both newspapers has
very little to do with the I'mgoing to say, and this is a
little unfair, but it has littleto do with the actual news.
It is an editorial.
(27:15):
It is.
And the same thing has happenedon CNN and Fox that most people
think when they're watching CNNand Fox between let's say eight
and 11:00 PM, that it is thenews I refer to.
It is news commentary.
Speaker 4 (27:33):
Yeah.
It's, it's, uh, it's theequivalent of an op-ed page.
Speaker 2 (27:37):
Yes.
But people listen and they go,yes, I heard it on CNN.
And that, therefore it's true.
I heard it on Fox.
And then depending on your pointof view, as you said before, you
will then refer to it as well.
Those people don't reinforce.
What I want to know is thereforeit's fake news or it's not real
(27:58):
news.
Speaker 4 (27:59):
Yeah.
I mean, the problem with that isthat now you have MSNBC on the
far left and you have Fox newson the far.
Right.
And you would have hoped thatsomebody would, some station
would be in the middle CNN,obviously isn't on.
And the problem is, is that theyprobably wouldn't get any
(28:21):
ratings.
Cause there was a down themiddle fact-based broadcast,
which is a sad state of affair.
But now you mentioned the termfake news, the other term that
kind of goes along with thatwould be alternative facts.
Right.
Right, right.
So, you know, kind of thosekinds of terms floating out
(28:42):
there, we're in a, we're in asituation where people have to
try to get the muddle their waythrough the wads of information
out there and try to form theirown opinion about things.
Now, whether people take thetime to do that, or they're
easily swayed by people who, um,shout above the din, that's
(29:05):
another story.
Speaker 2 (29:07):
And it would seem buried that right now, you know,
for the last year, during apandemic, if there was ever a
time that we needed facts and weneeded science that this is it.
And yet, you know, I love tosay, Oh, how naive Jonathan was
(29:28):
when he said pandemic, that'llbe the thing that'll bring us
all together because we're allin it together and how wrong I
was.
And yeah,
Speaker 4 (29:39):
Isn't that, isn't that the truth, you know, that
you could
Speaker 2 (29:42):
Polarize a pandemic.
Now it was there a role for themedia to, I mean, to try its
best to unpolluted rise it, or,or, you know, it, the media
unfortunately is no differentthan any other part of society.
It is you're on one side or theother, the same tribalism exists
(30:05):
in the media right now.
Speaker 4 (30:07):
And then the, the pandemic was, was, was
polarized.
Wasn't it?
I mean, it became an issue to bepolarized as opposed to an issue
to bring people together.
And that was the problem.
It could have been, uh, anissue.
It could have been a, um,something that brought us
together, but it was, it wasn'tnot used that way.
(30:30):
So therefore it became the samekind of issue as any other and
polarize people, you know, downhere.
Um, I guess just to be probablyended up being on the national
news, they, they showed a, uh,Tampa supermarket where nobody
wore masks.
And the owner basically said, Idon't believe anybody.
I don't believe 400 people,400,000 people have died.
(30:53):
Well, it's now 500,000, 400,000people have died of this
pandemic.
It's, it's not true.
You know, it's no more than it'sno more than heart disease and
you he's still, he was stillespousing that.
And he basically said, no oneneeds to wear a mask in my
supermarket.
People are merrily walking in.
(31:14):
It was okay.
Speaker 2 (31:15):
It was a national story.
So yes.
So let me, let me see if I canask you to, to, to, you know,
think out loud with me.
So if you were still either theeditor, we're the publisher of a
newspaper, like the Poughkeepsiejournal, uh, you know, a
(31:39):
newspaper in Duchess County, NewYork, how would you have covered
the story of the pandemic in aneffort?
I, you know, I, I only know youhave the highest caliber of news
reporting and, and I asked thisquestion making no judgment
(32:00):
whatsoever on the currentPoughkeepsie journal.
I'm just saying,
Speaker 4 (32:04):
So, so let me, let me try to give you an analogy.
So one of the more difficult anddivisive issues to cover.
So the last 20, 25 years hasalways been the fight over
(32:25):
abortion.
Okay.
And it was always an issue,always very, very difficult on
how to cover that because youcouldn't satisfy either side.
Um, if you called it, um, rightto life, um, people were opposed
to that.
It's not right.
The wife, it's something else.
(32:47):
If we called it pro abortion,well, it wasn't pro-abortion, it
was right to choose.
If you know what I mean, it was,you never could satisfy the
other side.
So you basically try to presentall sides of the story as fairly
as you could.
When you wrote a story on thecovering, you made sure to cover
both sides.
(33:07):
If there was a rally, if you met, if you've covered, you
basically had to try to be asfair as possible.
You went back to the roots ofjournalism, get the other side
of the story, make sure youquote as many sources in each
story as you can.
And don't, um, buy into one sideor the other without giving the
(33:31):
other side of the storyopportunity to have a fair say.
I think that will be the sameformula in, in this, in that,
you know, that there were goingto be two sides of the story and
that they were going to peoplewho disagreed with you, but try
to go to expert sources whereyou can and let the facts speak
(33:53):
for themselves.
Speaker 2 (33:55):
But no, no, no, no.
That, it's very helpful in, intwo ways.
First of all, I think what I'mhearing in that is partially an
answer to how we may get back tothe respect that journalism once
had and still has in manyplaces.
But you know, it's been underattack for years now, and that
(34:18):
is, you're saying, you'd go backto basics.
You go back to journalism one Ohone to say, how do you construct
a news story is partially what Iheard in that.
Um, and that, I think thatbecomes really important.
Um, but you know, it'sinteresting Barry that right now
(34:39):
in the Hudson Valley, 20 fully25% of people won't get
vaccinated.
Now, some of it or people thatare anti-vaxxers, some of it are
people that are simplydistrustful.
Some of it are people that say,well, I'm going to wait until
other people get it to see ifthere's something bad with the
(35:00):
vaccine.
What role does journalism, ifyou were assigning reporters,
how would you construct thatstory?
You know, where would, who wouldyou be getting to try to say,
let's make certain that peoplecan hear all sides to this.
And let's just say it's on thevaccine for a moment.
Speaker 4 (35:22):
Well, I think, I think my answer is the same in
that you, you go to the X asexpert sources as you can, but
you always give the other sidean opportunity to weigh in.
Um, but I think the, thepreponderance come down on the
side of, uh, of people gettingthe vaccine, but I think we do
(35:42):
need to always give people theopportunity to speak out.
Um, however, I think awell-constructed story would
speak for itself in terms ofexperts.
So expert sources giving theinformation, but you would try
to present in a well-roundedstory and sidebars and graphics
(36:04):
the data and sourcing that wouldlet people make up their own
minds intelligently.
Okay.
Not, not just presentingopinions, but presenting facts
as well.
I mean, it's not just enough toquote a doctor saying it's safe,
but to also make sure that, thatthe information in the article
(36:28):
is also presenting the data in away that people can understand
it.
So that makes sense.
It does, but let's go back tothe use of the term alternative
facts, which is know fascinatingconcept to me since there are
either facts or there aren't, Idon't know what an alternative
(36:49):
back then.
It's a better alternative factis not the truth.
That's just my opinion, butright.
But it's so permeated oursociety right now that the
notion is, well, that's not soin an article.
Um, all right.
So let me, let me, let's, let'sgive you another, let's go back
(37:12):
to another example.
My, my esteemed colleague, Johnpenny, um, who presided room
with a steam over our editorialpage for many, many years.
Um, we, we had a policy of, of,uh, running as many letters to
the editor as possible.
Um, and even a letter to theeditor was an opinion.
(37:36):
People would often try to citeas fact something in, in their
letter to back up their opinion.
However, we would research thatfact to make sure it was true to
(37:59):
make sure, so we would notmislead our readers.
So unless we could, we or thewriter could provide evidence
that the fact that was beingcited was in fact, true.
We would run that letter or wewould ask the writer to revise
it.
We always tried to write aletter, but if someone said the
(38:21):
Holocaust didn't happen, thatwas not a wetter that would meet
our standards.
Got it.
Okay.
But, you know, that's an extremeexample.
There are many examples wherepeople would take a little
Liberty with facts and we wouldcall them out on it in terms of
you need to provide supportingdocumentation for us to run that
(38:42):
letter.
All right.
So, so let me use the samething.
Would it be in terms of wellvaccines cause um, vaccines
cause autism, right.
So if somebody was, you know,was why aren't you taking the
vaccine or vaccines causeautism, well, can you show me
(39:05):
proof of that before it's goingto run in an article?
You know what I'm saying?
Speaker 2 (39:09):
Yes.
And, and in fact that was justbrought up.
I just heard that this morning,you know, as one of the reasons
that people still resist thevaccine and yet the news story
said, do you have any proof ofthat?
And there's been no substance,you know, at least the, this
(39:29):
news story is that there was nosubstantiation of the fact that
the vaccine caused autism
Speaker 4 (39:35):
Or vaccines in general, that re that reporters
seem to do his job.
And, and so some people wouldprobably say that, that, you
know, people who had a predispredisposed opinion that
vaccines cause autism probablywere upset with that reporter,
but truth of the matter, andmost people who look at things
(39:56):
down the middle would say, I seewhere that's coming from.
All right.
So you right
Speaker 2 (40:02):
From, you know, certainly your career was
certainly in print media.
Yes.
So then social media, really, Ithink as you say, you use the
right around the great recessionas a point in time where things
start to take off online.
(40:22):
And I will say it's veryinteresting that, so there's,
there's, there's Facebook,there's Twitter.
There is a, uh, there's apodcast for everything.
There is so much onlineinformation now it's not
necessary or an opinion.
And it's not necessarily thefact that you're looking for a
(40:47):
lot of times, you're justlooking for someone to reinforce
your beliefs.
But at the same time, Barry,it's very, you know, as someone
who likes newspapers and sittingin my computer, I can now access
newspapers all over the country.
And
Speaker 4 (41:05):
Yeah.
And let me just say, as asubscriber to newspapers, I
still get articles on Facebookand Twitter prior to him getting
them in the newspaper.
And I never understood that.
Why am I being, why am I beingdisadvantaged as a subscriber?
If you know what I mean?
(41:26):
That's one of the things that Idon't think the industry has
ever fully figured out.
Um, I'm sure that believes thatthat drives readers to the
newspaper afterwards.
But if I've already read thearticle, that's one less reason
to pick up the newspaper when itcomes on Sunday.
My personal opinion, I know I'mprobably sounding like an old
(41:47):
man, an old, the old man, butlet me just give you a couple of
quick facts here, um, to giveyou the kind of scope that we're
talking about now, good net,which has 260 properties, right?
Okay.
The new get at as 260 propertyit's revenue in Q4, Q4 of 2020
(42:11):
was$115 million revenue by theway, took a loss on that.
But nevertheless, it's$115million.
The New York times a successstory has more digital
subscribers than regularsubscribers.
It did$509 million.
(42:33):
Sounds like a really goodsuccess story.
And it is right, right.
$509 million in Q4 revenue,Google
Speaker 2 (42:43):
$56 billion.
Yes.
How do you compete with that?
And now what is it?
Apple now has a news servicecompletely digital,
Speaker 4 (42:58):
Right?
Speaker 2 (43:00):
And so is that where this is all heading post
pandemic that, you know, are weagain writing the epitaph of the
print?
Speaker 4 (43:11):
I think the national newspapers, like the times and
the wall street journal and theWashington post, I don't see
them going anywhere for many,many moons.
Um, whether the local newspapersurvive in their current form.
You know, I don't, I thinkpeople have been writing them
(43:32):
off for years.
I was asked years ago.
Um, how well do you think a bigHep-C journal will be around and
it's still around?
It's not in the same form thatit was when I was there, but
when I got there, but it's stillaround.
Um, but he was a littleharbinger.
I, um, taught a class at theMaris center for lifetime study.
(43:57):
And, um, people started askingme questions about the Gipsy
journal and there must've been120, 125 senior citizens in this
, um, in this, um, class.
Now these are people who youwould think of, um, would be
(44:19):
loyal newspaper readers.
And they asked me this typicalquestion.
Well, Barry, as the formerpublisher of the Poughkeepsie
journal, how much longer do youthink the Poughkeepsie journal
will be?
Speaker 2 (44:32):
Now?
This was four years ago or so.
And then I said, well, let meturn this question around and
ask you, how many of you stillsubscribe to the Poughkeepsie
journal?
Maybe 20, 20% of the hands wentup, right?
How many of you all farmersubscribers everyone's hand went
(44:53):
up?
Wow, that is four.
That's quite telling, you know,Barry, I still get up Saturday
morning because I am of that agethat likes to turn the pages and
see what's on the next page.
And I, and also partially limitscreen time.
(45:14):
So I'll pick up the wall streetjournal.
I'll pick up the, you know, likelet's say it's Saturday.
So that's my big day where it'sthe wall street journal, the New
York times, the local Democrat,it's a regional, I'm familiar
with it yet.
Local paper and Sullivan County.
Then I'll get the New York post,um, for another take on what's
(45:36):
happening.
And the end, the times Heraldrecord for, you know, Duchess,
Ulster and orange news.
Now I come home, I'm all happy.
I sit down to with, uh, you know, cuppa tea or something.
And my 20 year old kids come inand go, what are you doing?
(46:00):
What w w why, what a waste, youknow, not, not only is it a
waste of time from theirperspective, but they look at it
again, you're wasting paper,you're wasting, you're killing
trees.
What are you doing?
And they're, they're going, Icould, if it was news, I'd just
wait for it to come up on my,uh, you know, uh, my, uh, CNN
(46:21):
account on my Twitter feed orsomething else.
And, and the same is true withme watching the nightly news at
six 30, or I watch itreligiously.
Yes.
But they look at me and go, why,why do you do that?
What do you say to, you know,what, instead of your class of
seniors, very, what would yousay if it was a class of 20
(46:45):
somethings?
I mean, I guess the issue is, isthe content good enough?
And is the delivery in a formatthat is convenient to the
reader?
I think that the, you can'tstick to a delivery method that
(47:07):
doesn't please the reader, andit's a young person does not
want to read on fiber.
You'd have to give it to them oncyber.
Very, very, very well put, youknow, because I think as I think
about it, my two children arebig fans of podcasts.
They absolutely go to them tolisten to, you know, the issues
(47:32):
that are of importance to them.
So they've grown up in adifferent era.
And I hear I, sorry, but I findmyself again, wondering is this
the end?
The New York times, Sundayedition keeps looking smaller.
They had to invent entire newsections, the stay at home.
(47:52):
What is the section stay athome?
I think, right.
Yes.
Speaker 1 (47:56):
I love that.
I love it.
Speaker 2 (47:59):
It's full of ideas and recipes and ways that you
could get through the pandemic.
I thought it was very fair and Iget three mini puzzles.
You know, it's very clever, butif this, if a younger
generation, because certainly myfather started started me
(48:19):
reading the New York times.
And I, I probably, you couldcount on one hand the number of
additions that I have missed inmy entire life, but that is not
true for younger people.
No, not at all.
And so, but, but it's gotsomewhere
Speaker 1 (48:40):
In there I'm wondering is there
Speaker 2 (48:43):
Is, is the key, and maybe they've got it right.
That they can listen to so manysources in the way in which they
want to, they can then formulatetheir own judgment.
But I wonder going back tosomething you raised earlier,
which is, are, they are each ofthese sources really doing
(49:05):
fact-based journalism wherethey're really checking it
because that's journalism one Ohone.
And if you don't know thedifference between that, then
yes, you're, you can listen tofake news and alternative facts.
I mean, it comes down to thecontent, has to be there for
(49:28):
people to go to it.
They're not going to read thePoughkeepsie journal if there's
nothing in that, in it, theinterest people.
And if the content is stillalways geared toward middle age
and older, there's no reason fora young person to go through.
Right.
Absolutely.
So, okay.
So rather than my pessimism, I'mgoing to ask a, a long time a
(49:54):
member of this profession,what's your positive spin.
Then on the future of media, inwhatever format it is, how will
Speaker 1 (50:04):
I will, I will, I will frame
Speaker 2 (50:06):
It in a, in a prescription I think.
Um, and that is that journalismthat sheds light will eliminate.
And that's a good thing.
And ultimately people willrecognize that and, and
(50:30):
appreciate it.
And it will ensure the future ofjournalism because it's
essential to our democracy.
And without it, I don't knowwhere we'll be as a country.
So I have faith that people willrecognize that ultimately, Barry
Rothfeld thank you so much foryour time and joining us on
(50:51):
patterns and paradigms.
This is Jonathan trashcan, and Ilook forward to our listeners
joining me in the next step.
Speaker 1 (51:00):
Thank you for tuning in to patterns and paradigms the
pattern podcast.
For more information about thisepisode, visit our website
pattern for progress.org forwardslash podcast.
We are experiencing a paradigm shift, a fundamental
change in the way we usually dothings.
We are intentionally choosing tosee the silver lining
opportunity arises.
We can shine a light on thethings that weren't working well
(00:25):
on those things that weren'treally working at all, we can
regroup reevaluate andre-engineer it's time to explore
new patterns and paradigms thosethat inspire us to rise above
the chaos and explore how theconditions of today and take us
(00:47):
to a better tomorrow patternsand paradigms the pattern
podcast from Hudson Valleypattern for progress.
You're listening to season two,episode eight, fake news versus
fact-based journalism with yourhost pattern, president and CEO,
Jonathan Dropkin.
Speaker 2 (01:07):
Hi everyone, and welcome to patterns and
paradigms.
We hope you enjoy the discussionwe had last week with Mecca
Mitchell, the senior vicepresident for diversity
inclusion and communityengagement, as well as the chief
diversity officer forWestchester medical center.
(01:27):
Please remember to subscribe toour podcast and take a moment to
share an episode with a friendbubble or trend the weather in
Texas.
I certainly hope that the stormlast week is not a trend like
everything else in the UnitedStates.
(01:48):
Why shouldn't a winter storm bepolarizing.
The entire state loses itselectricity, but in the rush to
blame someone, you could choosea severe storm that challenged a
self-contained electric gridthat was not made for severe
weather, or you could blame thefact that some of the energy
(02:12):
that Texas produces comes fromgreen energy, wind turbines and
solar rays.
We can only hope that the desireto blame alternative energy is
the bubble and that the trend isto seek more comprehensive,
integrated, and innovative waysof addressing energy needs is
(02:32):
the trend, but Hey, it's Texas.
So whether there is a bubble ora trend, well, let's just say
that if in the midst of theimpact of one of the most severe
storms in the state's history,one of its U S senators decides
it's time to head to Cancun.
(02:53):
Well, it is part of a trend, butnot the kind we just described
before I introduce our guests.
Let me ask my partner atpattern, Joe Chakka what's up,
Joe, how you doing Joe?
Speaker 3 (03:11):
Pretty well surviving another storm up this way.
Speaker 2 (03:14):
It's just incredible.
It just doesn't stop snowing.
I always thought this was like abad Stephen King book.
What's happening this week at,Hey, we're working pretty hard
on putting the class togetherfor our community Rebuilders
program where I think what we'reit, Joe, it's a takeoff on
(03:34):
something you and I created acouple of years ago called
community builders, where wework with people on an idea that
they may have for theircommunity and try to take it to
a full blown plan for a project.
Speaker 3 (03:49):
Yeah, it's hard to believe five years ago, you and
I came up with this brain brainchild of an idea of creating the
community builders and it workedout pretty well.
We had two years worth ofclasses and we had anywhere
between six and eight, uh, youknow, professionals, uh, go
through the course and they tooka project and we tried to help
(04:12):
them make it come to fruition.
And we had a couple of reallygood successes downtown
Middletown Garnerville artscenter, uh, the Ritz theater.
So it was a very, very valuableprogram.
I think that a lot of people gotgotten a lot of good information
out of and, and their projectsdid well.
So, you know, last year we werethinking about doing the class
(04:35):
again and with all of the thingsgoing on with the pandemic we
thought, are we really buildinga community?
Or as you said, are werebuilding the community?
And I think the rebuilding fitsvery well.
So last week we had aninformation session on the
upcoming class and we hadsomewhere around 60 or 65 people
(05:00):
register for the informationcenter.
We had 40 and attendance, whichwas great.
And because the others couldn'tattend last week, we decided
this week, we're going to run itagain.
And so on Wednesday, February24th, at 5:00 PM, you can tune
into the community Rebuildersinformation session to learn
(05:21):
more about this year's class,which is going to start in April
run through June.
It's very much a fast moving, uh, bootcamp style, uh, community
development project and ourprogram and, uh, applications
will be due March 1st
Speaker 2 (05:40):
Well.
And I think we're, we're tryingto limit the size of the class
to ensure that, uh, patternstaff can give the participants
the kind of attention they needin developing their projects.
So I think our goal is to reallyhave only 10.
And I think there's only just,you know, two or three slots
left.
That's correct.
Speaker 3 (05:58):
Uh, you know, B, if we go beyond 10 people, then
we've, we think that we can'tgive the focus and the attention
on the projects that, that theydeserve.
Um, and it's going to be veryintensive, both for the
participants and for our ownstaff, because we always take
things and make them our own, ifyou will.
And, and when we do this, we putmore time in than we probably
(06:22):
should on some of these projectsbecause we just like them so
much and we want to see ourcommunity to advance
Speaker 2 (06:28):
Well.
And I think that you've hit iton the head, Joe, that, you
know, if someone comes to thepattern with an idea and we
think we can help them, then wekind of adopt it and we want it
to come to fruition.
And there's been a lot ofprojects that we've been
involved in over the years thatwe feel just that way,
(06:49):
everything else going on.
Speaker 3 (06:51):
Well, funny, you should ask tune into our YouTube
channel, go to our website, andyou'll be able to find the event
for this month's housing webinarand is focusing on the
moratorium on evictions.
We have an all-star panel that,that we did a prerecording on.
Um, and we're talking to, um,advocates, we're talking to, uh,
(07:13):
lenders and affordable housing.
And I was talking to legalservices and really trying to
hit every side of the evictionissue.
Uh, both of what's going on now.
And unfortunately what'sprobably coming down the line in
four, six, maybe eight months.
There's going to be a heck of acrisis that we're going to be
facing.
(07:33):
Um, and this webinar reallycovers a lot of those issues.
Speaker 2 (07:37):
The eviction crisis is the fact that people have not
been able to make their rentpayments landlords on the other
side, do need money in order tomaintain their properties.
So this is really an importantthing
Speaker 3 (07:52):
It is.
And, you know, in, in short, I'dlike to say that the rent crisis
for people not paying iscritical to the landlord.
Obviously it's critical to thetenant because you know that,
and that's why the eviction isthere.
You know, nobody wants to getkicked out on the street.
And so, you know, the, the, themoratorium itself is important
(08:18):
because it does stop theeviction.
But as we all say in thisbusiness, the rent does come
due.
And that's the big problem isthat there may be some tenants
that are four, six, 10, 12months behind in rent, and how
do they make up those kinds ofarrears?
And so some of the guests aretalking about some other rent
(08:39):
relief programs.
Um, and again, our legalservices representative, um, is
talking about, you know, takingcare of some issues where there
may be some unscrupulouslandlords, uh, in the business,
Joe, thanks a lot for takingissue on,
Speaker 2 (08:56):
And, and it's going to be enormous as this, uh, as
we come out of the pandemic andthe expectation is people need
to pay their rent.
So, um, a lot going on here atpattern.
Thanks, Joe.
Thank you today.
We're going to be talking withBarry Rothfeld.
Barry has had a long anddistinguished career in
(09:18):
journalism from reporter toeditor to publisher.
Barry has been in probably everyposition in the print media
world.
He has chaired the New Yorknewspaper publisher associations
board of directors, and as bothexecutive editor and publisher
(09:39):
of the Poughkeepsie journal herein Duchess County is well versed
on the issues facing the HudsonValley.
Hi, Barry, good to have you onpatterns and paradigms, how you
doing, and it sure seems likejudging by our zoom call.
You're not looking at snow rightnow.
Speaker 4 (10:00):
No, Jonathan, first of all, thanks for having me.
It's great to see you, eventhough we're 1200 miles apart or
so I'm actually here in sunny,Florida.
And, um, I could tell you that Icould join the chamber of
commerce if I had to.
Speaker 2 (10:16):
And, and how have you managed through the pandemic?
Have you been down in Florida orwhere, you know,
Speaker 4 (10:24):
W we've been, we've been down here since February
1st, so, and, um, other thanthat, we've been just like
everyone else.
We've been hunkered down inHopewell junction, New York, and
, uh, managing our way throughit, wearing our masks
religiously.
Are we now double mask?
Even, even though we did get ourfirst vaccination, uh, but we
(10:49):
still take it very, verycarefully.
We haven't eaten inside arestaurant yet.
Um, we basically bring foodhome.
We eaten outside the restaurantwhere we've been comfortable
that the tables were far enoughapart.
And, uh, even if we get oursecond vaccination, I think
we're going to be doing thatsame thing just to be extra
(11:09):
careful.
Speaker 2 (11:09):
Cool.
And I think this is going to allof 20, 21.
There's going to be some aspectof this pandemic.
That's going to be with us.
So, you know, Barry, I've knownyou since you've been, uh,
you've been a publisher you'vetold me about, you know, parts
of your career in, in stateorganizations in the media.
(11:30):
Um, but why don't for ourlisteners?
Why don't you briefly walkthrough your bio and tell us
your career, which makes it, itwill make it clear to our
listeners why I asked you tojoin me on this topic?
Speaker 4 (11:46):
Well, thanks.
Um, well, I wasn't always thepublisher.
I wasn't always on the businessside of the, a medium sized
business.
I started as a reporteractually.
Um, you know, I, um, back incollege I was editor of my
college paper.
Um, and, um, we're not toColumbia journalism school and
(12:07):
that a job would get net rightout of college at the port
Chester daily item inWestchester.
Um, and I stayed in Westchesterfor 17 years in various, uh,
reporting and editing roles andbecame senior managing editor
down there.
Um, and it was a greatopportunity, great learning
environment, good journalism.
(12:30):
And I always credit thatopportunity in that environment
with my love for communityjournalism and my belief that,
um, you know, local journalismwas sort of where it's at in
terms of the impact we can haveon our communities in 90.
I got the opportunity to move upto the Poughkeepsie journal as
the top editor and, um, uh, fellin love with the Mid-Hudson
(12:56):
Valley, um, and, uh, alwaysvowed that it would be my
permanent home, although Ganettehad different, different ideas
for me.
Um, and after, um, three or fouryears transferred me up to
Binghamton New York, um, where Iwas the top editor there.
And, um, a couple of years,three or four years later, um,
(13:18):
the opportunity to become apublisher was presented to me.
And after, so after about 25years in the editorial side of
the business, I considered theoptions and decided to take the
plunge and became publisher atthe Africa journal, um, which is
a great town to live in Ethica,um, four hours from everywhere,
(13:40):
however, um, and in the snowbelt, um, but a great community and
we make great lifelong friends,but I always want them to come
back to Poughkeepsie.
And several years after that job, um, I was, uh, when Dick Waco
was getting ready to retireafter an illustrious career at
the Poughkeepsie journal, I wasgiven the opportunity to come
(14:01):
back to Poughkeepsie where Ialways want them to come back to
and end my career.
And in 20 2004, I came back to,um, the Poughkeepsie journal as
the publisher where, um, youknow, I kind of always wanted to
be, um, I think the transitionfrom editor to publisher was a
(14:22):
natural one for me.
I mean, one of the things thatalways made a great, uh, a great
decision for me is that I stillwas able to keep my hands on the
editorial side of the business.
I also was able to take off someof the restrictions on being on
the edit as being an editor, asI was able to get more involved
in community activities.
(14:43):
Of course, um, you know, Ibecome became very, very active
in a bunch of communityactivities, being, serving on a
number of boards and being chairof a couple of them.
So that was, um, something that,um, was a bonus, some becoming
on the business side of the, ofthe legislative speak.
Speaker 2 (15:05):
So you've been a reporter, you've been an editor,
you've been a publisher.
And I think you've also told methat you were parts of various
state associations that, um, inthe media world.
Speaker 4 (15:20):
Yeah, I was, um, I was a long, a long time, um, uh,
trustee of the New York state,um, newspaper publishers
association.
And I actually was chair of thatboard also for one or two terms.
And, uh, it was, uh, anorganization that also went
through many, many changes asthe business changed.
(15:40):
And I'm sure we're going todiscuss that in the next 35 to
40 minutes as, um, you know,the, the member organizations
throughout the state, um, wentfrom being robust and cash rich
to being less.
So I'll put it like that.
And, uh, you know, and, and, andthey had to do a lot, a lot more
(16:05):
with a lot less
Speaker 2 (16:06):
Long before the pandemic.
There were those who werewriting the death of the modern
American newspaper.
And then, you know, as a resultof social media, where were we
before the pandemic?
Speaker 4 (16:20):
Long before the pandemic, people were talking
about the death of the Americannewspaper, that we were losing
subscribers, that young peopleweren't coming to newspapers,
but, um, I would go toconferences even as a middle
editor, um, and people wouldtalk about the need to attract
the readers because we're notgoing to get the readers that
(16:42):
would be able to support ouradvertising.
But the truth of the matter isright up until the 2008
financial crisis, newspaperswere really, really strong
business operations.
Um, we were able to have enoughreaders to deliver strong
results for our advertisers.
(17:03):
We made good money.
We had very, very strong profitmargins, and we in very, very
good shape at the 2008 financialcrisis not hit, who knows where
we would be, of course, with theadvent of the growth of the
internet.
Um, you could accuse theindustry of really not keeping
(17:25):
up and getting out ahead of thatand becoming, uh, getting on the
digital bandwagon, so to speakquickly enough, and really not
figuring out a way to not onlyattract digital subscribers and
digital readers, but neverreally figuring out a way how to
monetize that.
I hate that word, but that is animportant thing when you're
(17:45):
talking about the business.
So yes, it was, um, it was afactor, um, before the pandemic.
And of course the pandemic issomething that, um, accelerated
a lot of those factors.
Speaker 2 (17:59):
So within the Hudson Valley and just correct me if
I'd characterize this wrong, it,it, it almost feels as if the,
um, newspapers are even beingconsolidated more that the three
prominent go-to newspapers whenI started pattern where the
Poughkeepsie journal, the timesHerald record and the journal
(18:20):
news, but they now appear to bealmost one newspaper frequently
seeing the same story.
They're all owned by Ganette.
I think so help me out if I'vemischaracterized that
Speaker 4 (18:35):
Well, that's true.
Um, we can add is not theGanette that I worked for.
This is the new dinette in 2019Jeanette and Gatehouse merged.
And it was really a takeover by,um, by Gatehouse and it just
adopted the Ganette name.
So it only is Gatehouse who and
Speaker 2 (18:58):
Barry, who is Gatehouse.
Speaker 4 (19:01):
Well, date house was another large, um, media,
newspaper, Cottonelle, largelynewspaper company, um, that, um,
owned a bunch of regionalnewspapers, I think, including
Middletown, they took theGodette name, but the people who
run the new company are all thetop.
(19:23):
People are the Gatehouse.
People continue to consolidateoperations.
So it became a larger and largercompany.
And this happened not only inthe Hudson Valley, but around
the company and the, um, andstaff was cut.
Um, I think in the last fewmonths they made buyout offers
(19:44):
to anyone who would take it.
Um, and so, and I'm not beingcritical of this.
I'm just stating what I know,um, my understanding of what, of
what happened.
And so what they ended up doingis, uh, providing more regional
content.
Um, and, um, the control ofwhite appears tends to be run
(20:10):
out of a, uh, regional hub.
Um, and, um, so that is, youknow, something that is
different than when I ran thepaper out of eight 85 civic
center Plaza, so to speak.
Speaker 2 (20:27):
Absolutely.
And so it's interesting that asthe, the papers that I knew when
I first got to pattern, youknow, 15 years ago, continue to
consolidate, I have this feelingthough, that there is the rise
of the really local paper,either print or online that so
(20:50):
many of the communities in theHudson Valley beacon, or, or
around, uh, Ellenville or, uh,in Sullivan County, the
Democrat, it seems like almosteveryone either has a little
print paper or an online papercovering a tiny geographic area.
Speaker 4 (21:11):
Is that these kind of micro-site, um, operations are,
um, up and running.
I have no idea how theirfinances work or whether they
make any money or not.
But I do know that there are alot of them are out there and,
and beating the bigger boys, twostories on a regular basis.
(21:35):
Um, um, that said, um, I do haveto wonder from a first amendment
point of view, who is out thereproviding the checks and
balances on local government, uh, these days, like we used to do
in the good old days, um, asopposed to what I would call,
(21:58):
um, press-release journalism.
There's a lot of stories outthere that are just basically,
um, rewrites of what's handed toreport is as opposed to people
going to the scenes of, of, um,of, uh, what's happening out
there, or going to meetings, oractually trying to dig through
(22:18):
public records and trying toscratch the surface.
So scratch below the surface tofind out what's really going on.
I mean, there's, there's some ofthat going on at, at, um, at the
cadet paper still is a, youknow, like David McKay, Wilson
is still out there doing reallygood investigative journalism,
but there's not as much of thatgoing on as it was in the days
(22:44):
that, um, you know, backed intothe nineties and early two
thousands as you would see.
And that's one of the thingsthat worries me as, um, vibrant
newspaper operations become farand fewer.
Speaker 2 (23:02):
So I, I think that's a good place to jump off on the
issue of quote unquote fakenews.
It's, it's, you know, it's sadsince, you know, I grew up and I
am old enough to remember whoEdward R Murrow and Walter
(23:24):
Cronkite were in.
And you had this sense that whenit was uttered by Walter
Cronkite on the CBS eveningnews, it was fact it was
checked, it was researched.
And yet the attack on mediabeing fake news, and very much
(23:46):
to your point, the role of themedia as the fourth estate and
being there to challengegovernment at all levels,
whether, you know, we've seen itplay out in Washington or
Poughkeepsie, um, where, whereare we in and how do we ensure
the vitality of the fourthestate?
(24:07):
One question, and the secondquestion, how do we restore
people's confidence?
Speaker 4 (24:14):
Well, let me, let me kind of go back to where I think
this has all come from, and thisis kind of my off the cuff
analysis, for lack of a betterword.
You know, I think it startedwith talk radio back in the, you
know, 20 years ago and itmorphed into what's happened on
cable cable, um, cable, I'llcall it quote unquote news.
(24:42):
Um, you know, and, and over theyears that has become more
fractured and more fractious ina way.
Um, and you know, people don'tgo to these stations to find out
what's happening or to reallyfind out a fair and balanced to
(25:04):
use that term, um, reflection ofwhat's going on out there.
They turn into these stations toreinforce their and beliefs,
right.
And, and, um, and in manyrespects, it's serving to
further divide an alreadydivided country.
And that's very sad and veryscary and how you reverse that.
(25:30):
I'm not sure I had theprescription for that, except
that maybe that there's a leaderout there who will be able to do
that someday.
Um, some, um, hopefully theleader will be someone who can
bring people together as opposedto a leader who will further
divide people.
That's the scary part.
You don't know who that personmight be someday.
(25:52):
Um, you know, there are stillgood broadcasts and, and, um,
and, and re and, and reportersout there who report fairly, but
I don't know that peoplerecognize that anymore.
And, um, and, and that's a sadstate of affairs, but to be
honest with you, because I,people tend to look at things
(26:14):
through their own set of lenses.
And, um, and, and we've, we'vecome this far and reversing that
trend is going to be a very hardthing to do.
Speaker 2 (26:27):
You know, I I've often thought that, you know,
the, the actual reporting, uh,there, uh, let's see if I can
break it down this way and seeif you agree with this.
So like, if you take even thetwo biggest, most trusted
newspapers being, let's say theNew York times and the wall
street journal, that theirreporting is very good up until
(26:55):
you get to the editorial page.
Right.
And the editorial page is got,you know, in both newspapers has
very little to do with the I'mgoing to say, and this is a
little unfair, but it has littleto do with the actual news.
It is an editorial.
(27:15):
It is.
And the same thing has happenedon CNN and Fox that most people
think when they're watching CNNand Fox between let's say eight
and 11:00 PM, that it is thenews I refer to.
It is news commentary.
Speaker 4 (27:33):
Yeah.
It's, it's, uh, it's theequivalent of an op-ed page.
Speaker 2 (27:37):
Yes.
But people listen and they go,yes, I heard it on CNN.
And that, therefore it's true.
I heard it on Fox.
And then depending on your pointof view, as you said before, you
will then refer to it as well.
Those people don't reinforce.
What I want to know is thereforeit's fake news or it's not real
(27:58):
news.
Speaker 4 (27:59):
Yeah.
I mean, the problem with that isthat now you have MSNBC on the
far left and you have Fox newson the far.
Right.
And you would have hoped thatsomebody would, some station
would be in the middle CNN,obviously isn't on.
And the problem is, is that theyprobably wouldn't get any
(28:21):
ratings.
Cause there was a down themiddle fact-based broadcast,
which is a sad state of affair.
But now you mentioned the termfake news, the other term that
kind of goes along with thatwould be alternative facts.
Right.
Right, right.
So, you know, kind of thosekinds of terms floating out
(28:42):
there, we're in a, we're in asituation where people have to
try to get the muddle their waythrough the wads of information
out there and try to form theirown opinion about things.
Now, whether people take thetime to do that, or they're
easily swayed by people who, um,shout above the din, that's
(29:05):
another story.
Speaker 2 (29:07):
And it would seem buried that right now, you know,
for the last year, during apandemic, if there was ever a
time that we needed facts and weneeded science that this is it.
And yet, you know, I love tosay, Oh, how naive Jonathan was
(29:28):
when he said pandemic, that'llbe the thing that'll bring us
all together because we're allin it together and how wrong I
was.
And yeah,
Speaker 4 (29:39):
Isn't that, isn't that the truth, you know, that
you could
Speaker 2 (29:42):
Polarize a pandemic.
Now it was there a role for themedia to, I mean, to try its
best to unpolluted rise it, or,or, you know, it, the media
unfortunately is no differentthan any other part of society.
It is you're on one side or theother, the same tribalism exists
(30:05):
in the media right now.
Speaker 4 (30:07):
And then the, the pandemic was, was, was
polarized.
Wasn't it?
I mean, it became an issue to bepolarized as opposed to an issue
to bring people together.
And that was the problem.
It could have been, uh, anissue.
It could have been a, um,something that brought us
together, but it was, it wasn'tnot used that way.
(30:30):
So therefore it became the samekind of issue as any other and
polarize people, you know, downhere.
Um, I guess just to be probablyended up being on the national
news, they, they showed a, uh,Tampa supermarket where nobody
wore masks.
And the owner basically said, Idon't believe anybody.
I don't believe 400 people,400,000 people have died.
(30:53):
Well, it's now 500,000, 400,000people have died of this
pandemic.
It's, it's not true.
You know, it's no more than it'sno more than heart disease and
you he's still, he was stillespousing that.
And he basically said, no oneneeds to wear a mask in my
supermarket.
People are merrily walking in.
(31:14):
It was okay.
Speaker 2 (31:15):
It was a national story.
So yes.
So let me, let me see if I canask you to, to, to, you know,
think out loud with me.
So if you were still either theeditor, we're the publisher of a
newspaper, like the Poughkeepsiejournal, uh, you know, a
(31:39):
newspaper in Duchess County, NewYork, how would you have covered
the story of the pandemic in aneffort?
I, you know, I, I only know youhave the highest caliber of news
reporting and, and I asked thisquestion making no judgment
(32:00):
whatsoever on the currentPoughkeepsie journal.
I'm just saying,
Speaker 4 (32:04):
So, so let me, let me try to give you an analogy.
So one of the more difficult anddivisive issues to cover.
So the last 20, 25 years hasalways been the fight over
(32:25):
abortion.
Okay.
And it was always an issue,always very, very difficult on
how to cover that because youcouldn't satisfy either side.
Um, if you called it, um, rightto life, um, people were opposed
to that.
It's not right.
The wife, it's something else.
(32:47):
If we called it pro abortion,well, it wasn't pro-abortion, it
was right to choose.
If you know what I mean, it was,you never could satisfy the
other side.
So you basically try to presentall sides of the story as fairly
as you could.
When you wrote a story on thecovering, you made sure to cover
both sides.
(33:07):
If there was a rally, if you met, if you've covered, you
basically had to try to be asfair as possible.
You went back to the roots ofjournalism, get the other side
of the story, make sure youquote as many sources in each
story as you can.
And don't, um, buy into one sideor the other without giving the
(33:31):
other side of the storyopportunity to have a fair say.
I think that will be the sameformula in, in this, in that,
you know, that there were goingto be two sides of the story and
that they were going to peoplewho disagreed with you, but try
to go to expert sources whereyou can and let the facts speak
(33:53):
for themselves.
Speaker 2 (33:55):
But no, no, no, no.
That, it's very helpful in, intwo ways.
First of all, I think what I'mhearing in that is partially an
answer to how we may get back tothe respect that journalism once
had and still has in manyplaces.
But you know, it's been underattack for years now, and that
(34:18):
is, you're saying, you'd go backto basics.
You go back to journalism one Ohone to say, how do you construct
a news story is partially what Iheard in that.
Um, and that, I think thatbecomes really important.
Um, but you know, it'sinteresting Barry that right now
(34:39):
in the Hudson Valley, 20 fully25% of people won't get
vaccinated.
Now, some of it or people thatare anti-vaxxers, some of it are
people that are simplydistrustful.
Some of it are people that say,well, I'm going to wait until
other people get it to see ifthere's something bad with the
(35:00):
vaccine.
What role does journalism, ifyou were assigning reporters,
how would you construct thatstory?
You know, where would, who wouldyou be getting to try to say,
let's make certain that peoplecan hear all sides to this.
And let's just say it's on thevaccine for a moment.
Speaker 4 (35:22):
Well, I think, I think my answer is the same in
that you, you go to the X asexpert sources as you can, but
you always give the other sidean opportunity to weigh in.
Um, but I think the, thepreponderance come down on the
side of, uh, of people gettingthe vaccine, but I think we do
(35:42):
need to always give people theopportunity to speak out.
Um, however, I think awell-constructed story would
speak for itself in terms ofexperts.
So expert sources giving theinformation, but you would try
to present in a well-roundedstory and sidebars and graphics
(36:04):
the data and sourcing that wouldlet people make up their own
minds intelligently.
Okay.
Not, not just presentingopinions, but presenting facts
as well.
I mean, it's not just enough toquote a doctor saying it's safe,
but to also make sure that, thatthe information in the article
(36:28):
is also presenting the data in away that people can understand
it.
So that makes sense.
It does, but let's go back tothe use of the term alternative
facts, which is know fascinatingconcept to me since there are
either facts or there aren't, Idon't know what an alternative
(36:49):
back then.
It's a better alternative factis not the truth.
That's just my opinion, butright.
But it's so permeated oursociety right now that the
notion is, well, that's not soin an article.
Um, all right.
So let me, let me, let's, let'sgive you another, let's go back
(37:12):
to another example.
My, my esteemed colleague, Johnpenny, um, who presided room
with a steam over our editorialpage for many, many years.
Um, we, we had a policy of, of,uh, running as many letters to
the editor as possible.
Um, and even a letter to theeditor was an opinion.
(37:36):
People would often try to citeas fact something in, in their
letter to back up their opinion.
However, we would research thatfact to make sure it was true to
(37:59):
make sure, so we would notmislead our readers.
So unless we could, we or thewriter could provide evidence
that the fact that was beingcited was in fact, true.
We would run that letter or wewould ask the writer to revise
it.
We always tried to write aletter, but if someone said the
(38:21):
Holocaust didn't happen, thatwas not a wetter that would meet
our standards.
Got it.
Okay.
But, you know, that's an extremeexample.
There are many examples wherepeople would take a little
Liberty with facts and we wouldcall them out on it in terms of
you need to provide supportingdocumentation for us to run that
(38:42):
letter.
All right.
So, so let me use the samething.
Would it be in terms of wellvaccines cause um, vaccines
cause autism, right.
So if somebody was, you know,was why aren't you taking the
vaccine or vaccines causeautism, well, can you show me
(39:05):
proof of that before it's goingto run in an article?
You know what I'm saying?
Speaker 2 (39:09):
Yes.
And, and in fact that was justbrought up.
I just heard that this morning,you know, as one of the reasons
that people still resist thevaccine and yet the news story
said, do you have any proof ofthat?
And there's been no substance,you know, at least the, this
(39:29):
news story is that there was nosubstantiation of the fact that
the vaccine caused autism
Speaker 4 (39:35):
Or vaccines in general, that re that reporters
seem to do his job.
And, and so some people wouldprobably say that, that, you
know, people who had a predispredisposed opinion that
vaccines cause autism probablywere upset with that reporter,
but truth of the matter, andmost people who look at things
(39:56):
down the middle would say, I seewhere that's coming from.
All right.
So you right
Speaker 2 (40:02):
From, you know, certainly your career was
certainly in print media.
Yes.
So then social media, really, Ithink as you say, you use the
right around the great recessionas a point in time where things
start to take off online.
(40:22):
And I will say it's veryinteresting that, so there's,
there's, there's Facebook,there's Twitter.
There is a, uh, there's apodcast for everything.
There is so much onlineinformation now it's not
necessary or an opinion.
And it's not necessarily thefact that you're looking for a
(40:47):
lot of times, you're justlooking for someone to reinforce
your beliefs.
But at the same time, Barry,it's very, you know, as someone
who likes newspapers and sittingin my computer, I can now access
newspapers all over the country.
And
Speaker 4 (41:05):
Yeah.
And let me just say, as asubscriber to newspapers, I
still get articles on Facebookand Twitter prior to him getting
them in the newspaper.
And I never understood that.
Why am I being, why am I beingdisadvantaged as a subscriber?
If you know what I mean?
(41:26):
That's one of the things that Idon't think the industry has
ever fully figured out.
Um, I'm sure that believes thatthat drives readers to the
newspaper afterwards.
But if I've already read thearticle, that's one less reason
to pick up the newspaper when itcomes on Sunday.
My personal opinion, I know I'mprobably sounding like an old
(41:47):
man, an old, the old man, butlet me just give you a couple of
quick facts here, um, to giveyou the kind of scope that we're
talking about now, good net,which has 260 properties, right?
Okay.
The new get at as 260 propertyit's revenue in Q4, Q4 of 2020
(42:11):
was$115 million revenue by theway, took a loss on that.
But nevertheless, it's$115million.
The New York times a successstory has more digital
subscribers than regularsubscribers.
It did$509 million.
(42:33):
Sounds like a really goodsuccess story.
And it is right, right.
$509 million in Q4 revenue,Google
Speaker 2 (42:43):
$56 billion.
Yes.
How do you compete with that?
And now what is it?
Apple now has a news servicecompletely digital,
Speaker 4 (42:58):
Right?
Speaker 2 (43:00):
And so is that where this is all heading post
pandemic that, you know, are weagain writing the epitaph of the
print?
Speaker 4 (43:11):
I think the national newspapers, like the times and
the wall street journal and theWashington post, I don't see
them going anywhere for many,many moons.
Um, whether the local newspapersurvive in their current form.
You know, I don't, I thinkpeople have been writing them
(43:32):
off for years.
I was asked years ago.
Um, how well do you think a bigHep-C journal will be around and
it's still around?
It's not in the same form thatit was when I was there, but
when I got there, but it's stillaround.
Um, but he was a littleharbinger.
I, um, taught a class at theMaris center for lifetime study.
(43:57):
And, um, people started askingme questions about the Gipsy
journal and there must've been120, 125 senior citizens in this
, um, in this, um, class.
Now these are people who youwould think of, um, would be
(44:19):
loyal newspaper readers.
And they asked me this typicalquestion.
Well, Barry, as the formerpublisher of the Poughkeepsie
journal, how much longer do youthink the Poughkeepsie journal
will be?
Speaker 2 (44:32):
Now?
This was four years ago or so.
And then I said, well, let meturn this question around and
ask you, how many of you stillsubscribe to the Poughkeepsie
journal?
Maybe 20, 20% of the hands wentup, right?
How many of you all farmersubscribers everyone's hand went
(44:53):
up?
Wow, that is four.
That's quite telling, you know,Barry, I still get up Saturday
morning because I am of that agethat likes to turn the pages and
see what's on the next page.
And I, and also partially limitscreen time.
(45:14):
So I'll pick up the wall streetjournal.
I'll pick up the, you know, likelet's say it's Saturday.
So that's my big day where it'sthe wall street journal, the New
York times, the local Democrat,it's a regional, I'm familiar
with it yet.
Local paper and Sullivan County.
Then I'll get the New York post,um, for another take on what's
(45:36):
happening.
And the end, the times Heraldrecord for, you know, Duchess,
Ulster and orange news.
Now I come home, I'm all happy.
I sit down to with, uh, you know, cuppa tea or something.
And my 20 year old kids come inand go, what are you doing?
(46:00):
What w w why, what a waste, youknow, not, not only is it a
waste of time from theirperspective, but they look at it
again, you're wasting paper,you're wasting, you're killing
trees.
What are you doing?
And they're, they're going, Icould, if it was news, I'd just
wait for it to come up on my,uh, you know, uh, my, uh, CNN
(46:21):
account on my Twitter feed orsomething else.
And, and the same is true withme watching the nightly news at
six 30, or I watch itreligiously.
Yes.
But they look at me and go, why,why do you do that?
What do you say to, you know,what, instead of your class of
seniors, very, what would yousay if it was a class of 20
(46:45):
somethings?
I mean, I guess the issue is, isthe content good enough?
And is the delivery in a formatthat is convenient to the
reader?
I think that the, you can'tstick to a delivery method that
(47:07):
doesn't please the reader, andit's a young person does not
want to read on fiber.
You'd have to give it to them oncyber.
Very, very, very well put, youknow, because I think as I think
about it, my two children arebig fans of podcasts.
They absolutely go to them tolisten to, you know, the issues
(47:32):
that are of importance to them.
So they've grown up in adifferent era.
And I hear I, sorry, but I findmyself again, wondering is this
the end?
The New York times, Sundayedition keeps looking smaller.
They had to invent entire newsections, the stay at home.
(47:52):
What is the section stay athome?
I think, right.
Yes.
Speaker 1 (47:56):
I love that.
I love it.
Speaker 2 (47:59):
It's full of ideas and recipes and ways that you
could get through the pandemic.
I thought it was very fair and Iget three mini puzzles.
You know, it's very clever, butif this, if a younger
generation, because certainly myfather started started me
(48:19):
reading the New York times.
And I, I probably, you couldcount on one hand the number of
additions that I have missed inmy entire life, but that is not
true for younger people.
No, not at all.
And so, but, but it's gotsomewhere
Speaker 1 (48:40):
In there I'm wondering is there
Speaker 2 (48:43):
Is, is the key, and maybe they've got it right.
That they can listen to so manysources in the way in which they
want to, they can then formulatetheir own judgment.
But I wonder going back tosomething you raised earlier,
which is, are, they are each ofthese sources really doing
(49:05):
fact-based journalism wherethey're really checking it
because that's journalism one Ohone.
And if you don't know thedifference between that, then
yes, you're, you can listen tofake news and alternative facts.
I mean, it comes down to thecontent, has to be there for
(49:28):
people to go to it.
They're not going to read thePoughkeepsie journal if there's
nothing in that, in it, theinterest people.
And if the content is stillalways geared toward middle age
and older, there's no reason fora young person to go through.
Right.
Absolutely.
So, okay.
So rather than my pessimism, I'mgoing to ask a, a long time a
(49:54):
member of this profession,what's your positive spin.
Then on the future of media, inwhatever format it is, how will
Speaker 1 (50:04):
I will, I will, I will frame
Speaker 2 (50:06):
It in a, in a prescription I think.
Um, and that is that journalismthat sheds light will eliminate.
And that's a good thing.
And ultimately people willrecognize that and, and
(50:30):
appreciate it.
And it will ensure the future ofjournalism because it's
essential to our democracy.
And without it, I don't knowwhere we'll be as a country.
So I have faith that people willrecognize that ultimately, Barry
Rothfeld thank you so much foryour time and joining us on
(50:51):
patterns and paradigms.
This is Jonathan trashcan, and Ilook forward to our listeners
joining me in the next step.
Speaker 1 (51:00):
Thank you for tuning in to patterns and paradigms the
pattern podcast.
For more information about thisepisode, visit our website
pattern for progress.org forwardslash podcast.
Popular Podcasts
Stuff You Should Know
If you've ever wanted to know about champagne, satanism, the Stonewall Uprising, chaos theory, LSD, El Nino, true crime and Rosa Parks, then look no further. Josh and Chuck have you covered.
24/7 News: The Latest
The latest news in 4 minutes updated every hour, every day.
Dateline NBC
Current and classic episodes, featuring compelling true-crime mysteries, powerful documentaries and in-depth investigations. Follow now to get the latest episodes of Dateline NBC completely free, or subscribe to Dateline Premium for ad-free listening and exclusive bonus content: DatelinePremium.com