Journalism in Hawaii–The Press
Price of Paradise · Hawaii Public Radio · aired 1996-02-18
Guests: John Flanagan (publisher and editor, Honolulu Star-Bulletin); Jim Gatti (editor, The Honolulu Advertiser); Tom Brislin (Professor of Journalism, University of Hawaii)
Duration: 1:00:05

[00:00:00] Randall Roth: Good morning. This is Randy Roth, host of the Price of Paradise Radio Show. We're broadcast live each Sunday morning on KHPR 88.1 FM and KKUA 90.7 FM, and then rebroadcast Sunday evenings at 8:00 on KIFO 1380 AM. Everyone who works to bring this show to you is a volunteer. We do what we do because we enjoy doing it and because we believe in the importance of lively and informed dialogue. Our sponsor is the Hawaii Community Foundation, an organization that encourages grassroot efforts to improve the quality of life in Hawaii and it manages charitable funds with efficiency and compassion. Today's topic is the press in Hawaii. Joining me in the studio to discuss it are John Flanagan and Tom Brislin, and we're expecting Jim Gaddy any minute.

[00:01:07] Randall Roth: John Flanagan became executive editor of the Honolulu Star Bulletin in 1987, and editor and publisher in 1993. During that period, the newspaper changed considerably both in appearance and content, expanding its coverage of economic affairs and pocketbook issues, adding investigative reporting, and establishing a new Washington bureau. Flanagan is a native of New England, who attended the University of Notre Dame and graduated from the University of Missouri School of Journalism. He began his journalism career in 1970 as a photographer at the News Journal in Wilmington, Delaware. By the time he left Wilmington 14 years later, he was managing editor. In 1984, he moved to the West Coast as editor of the Marin Independent Journal in San Rafael, which subsequently won the California Publishers Association top award for general excellence.

[00:02:30] Randall Roth: Flanagan is president of the Hawaii Publishers Association and a member of the Honolulu Community Media Council. He also serves on the board of Aloha United Way. Good morning, John. Also, Tom Brislin. Tom is an associate professor of journalism at the University of Hawaii. His teaching and research interests include journalism ethics, media and society, Hawaii journalism history, and specialized reporting. Brislin served 12 years at the Honolulu advertiser, including slots as city editor, assistant news editor, and education reporter editor. Before coming to Hawaii in 1977, he edited the Pacific Dateline on Guam, where he also directed radio and TV news and educational programming. Tom received his BA from the University of Guam and an MA and PhD in communication at the Ohio State University.

[00:03:54] Randall Roth: He has conducted workshops for international journalists for the East-West Center and has addressed the nation's editors on ethical concerns at the annual conference of the Associated Press managing editors. Tom's current projects include intercultural effects on journalistic practices among foreign correspondents in Japan. Good morning, Tom.

[00:04:28] Tom Brislin: Good morning, Randy. Good morning, John.

[00:04:45] Randall Roth: If you've seen your Honolulu advertiser this morning, you know that on the op-ed page, page B3 in the Focus section, there is an article by Tom Brislin. The headline is "Dailies deal in News Lite". That sounds pretty critical, Tom. What do you think?

[00:05:01] Tom Brislin: Well, let me, let me say, Randy, that as you read, I, I come to the table here, not necessarily as an outsider. I spent 20 years in the day-to-day practice of journalism, and I realize it's realities. And it's my concerns are nonetheless pronounced about the direction that journalism is taking, and it's kind of like when the cheerleaders start criticizing the calls the coaches are making that maybe it's time to take a look at the the whole game plan. So, what I laid forth this morning, I kind of feel like reading the, the funnies here over the radio for what's in the paper is I I think that people are turning away from newspapers because in many ways, they're sensing a distance between the newspapers and themselves.

[00:05:52] Tom Brislin: The newspapers seem to represent the establishment, the economic establishment, the political establishment that is kind of upsetting their daily lives, rather than being their representatives in countering the, the the ill effects of that establishment.

[00:06:08] Randall Roth: Let me let me get a reaction to that, and I'll come right back to you. John Flanagan, what do you think of that?

[00:06:25] John Flanagan: Well, I think historically, obviously the newspapers were an establishment. Just the mass of the capital investment required to start a newspaper and keep one going, meant that there weren't very many of them and they tend to therefore to have power gravitate to them. But today, I don't think that's the case. And I think one of the reasons for the apparent disaffection with newspapers is the fact that newspapers today have so much competition compared with newspapers of even five years ago. Five years ago, the internet was a word and today it's a reality. Not only is it a reality, but we see a fairly substantial number of people being able to get their news in other fashions.

[00:07:15] John Flanagan: I think here in Hawaii, where not that many years ago, certainly within the lifetimes of most of our people, NFL football was something that you saw a week later and was brought in videotape by plane and today, you can see three games on a Sunday and another one on a Monday. And there's just so much competition for people's time. I think too, Hawaii, particularly is more involved in the world today than it may have been 20 years ago, and there are so many there's so much media, there's so much information competing for people's attention, that you can get comfortable and feel that you're informed, feel that you're aware, and involved in the world, and yet not be all that involved in your local community.

[00:07:49] John Flanagan: And the local community and what's happening there and who's making it happen is really the franchise that local newspapers have.

[00:08:06] Randall Roth: Tom Brislin, what do you think of that?

[00:08:22] Tom Brislin: I I can't do anything but agree that that is the the franchise of local newspapers is local news, and I agree that there's a tremendous competition for time and for those who want very specialized information, the internet and other kinds of computer-assisted services are available to them. But I still maintain that a lot of people are turning away from newspapers because they don't see themselves in it. They don't see how things touch their daily lives. A lot of stories about government and politics are written for insiders. They're very useful for political handicappers, but not particularly useful for people who are touched by welfare policies, by other other policies of the government, that the stories are written on the basis of the personality of the policymakers and the kind of inner-ness and warfare that goes on in government, rather than that how that affects the person who's listening to the radio or reading the newspaper.

[00:09:13] Randall Roth: John, what do you think?

[00:09:30] John Flanagan: Well, I think that certainly is a criticism that we levy on ourselves. I think to a certain extent, the reporter who goes out and covers the University of Hawaii football team and the reporter who goes and covers the legislature have many things in common in terms of getting caught up in the personalities and all the rest of it. Tom mentions in his article coverage of the City Council where there was a lot of there there was a lot of reportage about sort of personality issues and what was going on in people's lives, and who who was whose boyfriend or girlfriend and who got hired and this and that. There was a lot of sniping going on for a for a period a few months ago.

[00:10:03] John Flanagan: And I think certainly the details of that, although they may be fascinating to people were not that important, but it has to be placed in the overall context that this is what they were doing down at City Council instead of doing taking care of business. And a lot of the things that happened or didn't happen at City Council happened or didn't happen because of of what was going on, and what was going on was a lot of personal infighting. So it's one of those situations where you're kind of you're damned if you do and you're damned if you don't. Newspapers in particular have, at least in America, in the 20th century, have a tradition of objectivity, and reporters often can't stand back and say why they're reporting what they're reporting, or why they think this is important. They just have to put it down and hope other people agree with them.

[00:10:53] John Flanagan: And as a result, sometimes they report things that might seem petty to an outsider who just, who just picked up the story, and and was wondering, well, what's going on in the in the larger picture.

[00:11:10] Tom Brislin: Well, I think even within the context of objectivity, the kind of reporting that you're talking about, which we call analysis, which is the franchise of the newspapers, that there ought to be the opportunity for reporters to say, what is the context? You know, one thing that that I've admired, I don't want to come off as is entirely negative. I'm a great fan of newspapers. And one thing I've really enjoyed in the the Saturday Star Bulletin are the columns that you and managing editor Dave Shapiro have been writing, especially the one about his his pictures. His picture. Here was an editor talking directly to the readers on the kind of thinking we go through in running photos, and I think that kind of that kind of analysis, a piece by your political writer, Gerry Burris, when he was politics editor of at the Advertiser, used to run a regular column, giving that that kind of context.

[00:12:00] Tom Brislin: I agree the watchdog function of the press. We've got to know whether they're frittering away their time or working on substantial issues is there. But just one more example and and Randy, I know I do run on so so cut me off when you feel you should. I live in in Senator Norman Mizuguchi's district, and then a couple years ago when it was who's going to be Senate President, Mizuguchi or Milton Holt or someone else, I never read in either newspaper what difference it would make to me. Would it mean that we'd get an expansion of our of our district park? Would it mean we'd get better roads? What difference does it make to a voter in Norman's district whether he becomes the the president, what difference would it make in his legislative agenda? Would it mean he'd be pushing for welfare reform or gambling?

[00:12:51] Tom Brislin: Nothing. It was just purely personality and who had how many votes on on which side. So it's that kind of coverage I think people just give up on. This appeals to, you know, the 50 some odd legislators and a few other people in the state capitol but not to, not to folks like you and me.

[00:13:07] John Flanagan: Well, I I I hate to be cast, you know, I I don't want to defend newspapers against that that criticism because it's one we make of ourselves. And what one thing that we're trying to do is to uh is to turn around at a meeting and instead of just reporting what the people on the dais are talking about or the decision that's made or all the rest of it is to talk to the people in the crowd, and to to take it home to the neighborhood and and find out, you know, exactly what you're talking about, what does what does this uh this action really mean to real people? And uh where's it going? So you know, I I I can't I can't argue with you because I agree with you.

[00:13:41] Randall Roth: Is the whole idea to do this because that's what readers want, or to do this because it's the right thing whether they want it or not? Because maybe they want the personality and the conflict and the sort of thing that Tom is critical of in his piece this morning.

[00:13:58] Tom Brislin: Well, Randy, that's the, that's the, the big thing about about newspapers and about journalism in general. Uh, a friend of mine once told me that every boat is a compromise. Well, if a boat is a compromise, a newspaper is a is a, you know, a gigantic compromise. And uh, in a time when newspapers were the only game in town, uh, a lot of people took their castor oil and uh and swallowed hard and and got what what a great editor, an Oliver Wendell Holmes or whoever thought they ought to they ought to know. But in the, in these days with the competition that exists for uh to provide information to people, um, we have to put a little sugar on the pill sometimes, and uh, we try to strike a balance between what people want to read, what people are interested in reading about, and uh what people need to know in order for uh this crazy system of ours to work.

[00:14:31] Tom Brislin: And uh, as a result, there's a mix and we intentionally and and very deliberately try to provide the mix. Well, for it to be a mix, it can't be all one thing or or all another. And uh, we understand and we've taken on a responsibility to inform people. Uh, at the same time, uh, when the Eagles come to town, I mean, that may not be the world's most earth shaking story, you can be justified on the basis of all the money that changed hands for those tickets and the fact that there was going to be a giant traffic jam. But basically, there's a lot of people who wanted to read about the Eagles and and who cared about it, and who are fascinated by it and who tapped their toes when the Eagles sing on the radio, and they just wanted to read about it. So we, we probably gave that story a lot, and we felt a little embarrassed being a bunch of baby boomers mostly the editors at the Star-Bulletin with the kind of ride that we gave that story uh but on the other hand, I think we served readers there and we informed them.

[00:15:05] Randall Roth: Okay. I want to remind listeners that this is the Price of Paradise Radio Show. We call it Pop Radio. If you'd like to ask a question or make a brief comment, you just have to call us at 955-8821. Neighbor islanders, just add a 1-800 to that number, 1-800-955-8821. Our topic today is the press in Hawaii, and with me in the studio is John Flanagan, the editor and publisher of the Honolulu Star Bulletin, and Tom Brislin, an associate professor of journalism at the University of Hawaii, Manoa. We're hoping to have Jim Gaddy, the editor of the Honolulu advertiser, join us very, very soon. If you missed the beginning of this program, would like to hear it in its entirety tonight at 8 o'clock on KIFO 1380 AM, you'll have that opportunity.

[00:15:55] Randall Roth: Again, if you'd like to ask a question or make a brief comment, just call us at 955-8821. Well, I'd like to play a couple clips from interviews that our intern Alea Yap conducted with first an L. Amorall from the legislature and then someone else that I'll describe in a moment. Jeff, if you could put that first clip on.

[00:16:12] Caller: There was an inherent um um cushion built in that allows the two newspapers to be lazy and so I think if the joint operating agreement did not exist that it would force the two newspapers to actually be much more competitive with one another and the benefit would be to the public that we get better news because we'd see real competition. So I don't think that that's helped us access better newspapers. It's just made them both very comfortable. And yes, and lazy.

[00:16:45] Randall Roth: That was an L Amaral from the legislature talking about the so-called JOA, the Joint Operating Agreement. And now, Dave Pellegrin, who is the president of Honolulu Publishing, which publishes Honolulu Magazine and Hawaii Investor magazine. Jeff.

[00:17:02] Caller: If there ever was a justification for maintaining the joint operating agreement that exempts the two local dailies from our nation's anti-trust laws, it has long since passed. Even if you put aside the tremendous growth in broadcast and cable media over the past 15 years, plus the recent explosive growth of online internet media, there are still all kinds of print media that are trying to find a niche today that weren't around when the JOA was conceived. You've got direct order you've got direct mail, total market coverage papers such as Midweek. You've got neighbor neighbor neighborhood weeklies, you've got narrow focused papers made possible by desktop publishing, plus you've got alternative papers such as Honolulu Weekly, and all of these have the potential to provide true alternative editorial voices.

[00:17:52] Caller: And that was the bottom line justification of the JOA to begin with. The fact is, by taking advertising dollars out of the market that would be spent elsewhere if the JOA were disbanded, the JOA impedes the development of truly independent editorial voices.

[00:18:09] Randall Roth: John Flanagan, a little bit ago, you mentioned the word competition and suggested that that there's a lot of competition for you right now, and there are some people and in my unscientific survey over the last couple weeks, an awful lot of them are in the legislature. There are some people who feel that the JOA has been a bad thing for the people of Hawaii, that as N. Amaral commented, it's enabled the two newspapers to to get cozy and in her word, lazy, rather than have to compete fiercely for the attention of the public. What do you think?

[00:18:26] John Flanagan: Well, uh the JOA was almost 30 years old when I came to Hawaii and I was 40 years old, so it it kind of kind of puts this thing in perspective for me. It's something that we've had to live with here uh as a newsman, I don't like the JOA anymore than anyone else. I would rather be able to compete with uh the other newspaper uh on a business footing and advertising and delivery and uh in marketing and how well we run the business and how well we print the the uh the paper uh and under the joint operating agreement where uh Hawaii Newspaper Agency handles the printing and the advertising sales and the business office and the marketing for both newspapers and uh where the newspapers just compete editorially, uh we're separately owned and uh we're we have independent staffs and uh and uh in the old days Jerry Kier and I remarked that uh in the whole time we were competing with each other before he left the advertiser, um, I had never been in his newsroom and he'd only been in my newsroom once when all the computers crashed and he had to try to find a Macintosh to try to get the newspaper out and uh he came in and borrowed one.

[00:18:43] John Flanagan: But uh we do compete, but we only compete editorially. And we've got two

[00:19:00] Speaker 1: separate companies, two separate owners and we compete for readership. We don't compete for advertising, where the advertising is sold by by one company for both of us.

[00:19:30] Speaker 2: But but you would just as soon be competing head-to-head.

[00:20:01] Speaker 1: I would much rather be competing head-to-head and that's where where I came from and where I spent my career. Um, I think people considering uh Dave Pellegrin's comments and NL Amaral's comments really also have to consider where they're coming from and Dave is a publisher. Um, Dave is competing for advertising dollars with Hawaii Newspaper Agency. Uh Hawaii Newspaper Agency has two newspapers who do very well, who which are well-thought of by the public and um they're tough competitors for Dave and I can understand his uh his his dismay and his uh his feeling that um maybe the maybe the competitive uh ball field ought to be tilted a different way. And for state legislatures to say that they've got problems with the press is not is not uh too surprising. Um, it's part of the part of the press's job to hold the legislature's feet to the fire and and nobody really uh placed in that position uh with their toes getting warm would feel particularly uh happy with the person who's doing that. So, um

[00:21:34] Speaker 2: Okay. let me get Tom Brislin's reaction to this, then we've got some people on the lines. Tom Brislin?

[00:22:04] Speaker 3: Well, let me let me take the broader uh kind of academic view about the joint uh uh operating agency or the Newspaper Preservation Act. It's really an extension of of the First Amendment. I mean, newspapers have always gotten uh some federal protection through the First Amendment to the to the Constitution because they were seen as a part of the democratic process. Uh newspapers fuel democracy by providing information to people so that they can make intelligent decisions about the governance uh of the country. Direct mail advertising isn't providing that kind of information and uh you know, touristy magazines and handouts and shoppers and uh uh they they're not providing that kind of information. Uh newspapers are. So, the Newspaper Preservation Act was a way to keep two separate editorial voices so that the citizenry can get the kind of information that they need to run the government and that deserves protection.

[00:23:06] Speaker 3: Now, the intention wasn't to make newspapers terribly profitable, but that's certainly been a been a side effect of it. But uh apparently, Congress still feels that uh that's a that's a good tradeoff to let some people make a whole lot of money so that a lot of other people can have the information they need uh to run this government that we call a democracy. So actually, it helps uh NL Amaral to have two uh newspapers.

[00:23:37] Speaker 2: Interesting to hear our our critic more or less support the the JOA and in fact, when I did my survey of the 17 people from the legislature who responded, all but one said the JOA was a bad thing should be eliminated. But I I had, I think, about 30 people respond from the Honolulu Media Council and two out of three of them said the JOA was good because otherwise and and they had different reasons, but the main theme was that otherwise, you would be left with one newspaper.

[00:24:08] Speaker 1: Yeah, under the under the certain as things have evolved, Randy, over the years, uh we've gotten to the position where uh if the joint operating agreement ceased, um the Honolulu Star-Bulletin would be placed in the position of having no press, no trucks, no printers, uh no building, no furniture, it would be it would be very difficult for us to do that and uh and it would be uh in all likelihood uh necessary for us to to to go away or to try to emerge someday as something else, but probably not as a daily newspaper.

[00:24:38] Speaker 2: I want to welcome Jim Gatti. Jim is the uh editor of the Honolulu Advertiser. He spent 26 years at the Detroit News, most recently as deputy managing editor. He's a lifelong Michigan resident, graduate of Wayne State University, an English major. He's an army veteran, spent a year in Hawaii in the late 60s. He's married with four children, three still in college. He's 52 years old and rising. Good morning, Jim.

[00:25:09] Speaker 4: Thank you very much, Randy. Thanks for the invitation. I'm happy to be here.

[00:25:40] Speaker 2: Welcome. Um we just have invited some calls. What I'm going to do is take some of those calls and then in a little bit, Jim, I want to come to you and get your thoughts on a few of the things that that we've been discussing.

[00:26:11] Speaker 5: Yeah, it is. Just to chime in a bit on the joint operating agreement. I'm I'm one of the media council people filled in your form and I think it's a get real time on that. You you eliminate the benefits of the joint operating agreement and you increase the likelihood that we'll be like many cities now, a one-newspaper town. And and that's a step in the wrong direction. Um to to change the conversation a little bit, the one area I I would be critical of is the the media's coverage of itself and and though we tend to read stories that tell us which uh TV news anchor is doing what and and how the ratings are going, the real hard news on on the business of media is is is barely recorded at all. I'd be interested in in in comments on that. One thing comes to mind. It's a story that's been around for years but never covered by anybody is is how the Star-Bulletin, which was a Gannett operation for many years uh as the story goes from reporters themselves, Phil Gienella in the short term made a good business out of it, but in the long term, damaged the paper and then moved over to the Advertiser, which uh was sold to Gannett and uh some people are saying is now doing the same thing to to the Advertiser. Uh nobody's nobody's ever given us a a a real good look on the business of of of running the newspapers and how it's affected people. And I think um if if there was more of that, there might be a little less criticism of of mechanisms like the joint operating agreement.

[00:27:12] Speaker 2: Let's get a reaction to that from Jim Gatti.

[00:27:43] Speaker 4: Well, I can't give you much of a historical context on what what preceded me in Honolulu. Uh I come from Detroit where a JOA was uh enacted in 1989, a process that began uh 1986 and took three years to get through the court system, and I'm absolutely convinced that without the JOA in Detroit, there would be one newspaper there. And the common criticism about profits and loss of competition or the changing nature of competition simply hasn't been born out in Detroit. In the five years of the JOA, there've been two years of profits. The competition in in the newsroom has remained as intense and as passionate as it always was and it was very passionate for my whole career there and I think the same thing is happening in Honolulu to some extent. Uh the as far as I can observe, the these two newsrooms are are very intensely competitive. I don't know much about the profit situation here but I can tell you that as a person who over the years had $50 a month deducted from my check to buy Gannett stock, the returns on that stock are around the area of three or 4%, that's not an exorbitant profit and the people that own those shares include employees, so it's a it's a much more complicated question than than saying that uh this is a a measure that ensures profits or that uh impairs quality and I don't think that's been born out here.

[00:28:14] Speaker 2: John Flannagan, what about Chuck Friedman's comment that the the newspapers in Hawaii have not done a very good job of of covering the the business of of providing news to the public.

[00:28:45] Speaker 1: I think that's legitimate. Um I think we could do a much better job. I guess when we look at all the things that people are interested in and all the things that we would like to cover, uh covering ourselves seems a little self-serving and uh it's uh I I I think there's sort of two sides to that coin and in terms of considering it from uh the point of view of what do you try to do next? What do you try to add to your coverage? Um but uh I think uh people probably are more interested in the in the media that we give them uh credit for. I think we we uh probably could uh could build some readership if we wrote more about what's going on in the in media in this town.

[00:29:16] Speaker 2: Let me ask our journalism professor. What do you think of that?

[00:29:47] Speaker 3: I I echo uh Chuck Friedman's sentiments that one thing that has always been lacking has been self-coverage and I think that can be traced to the early years of kind of paranoia in the joint operating agreement that we don't want to communicate information about ourselves, that we want to we want to hold this information in. But the media are uh they're major institutions uh not just in this community but in the country, and they don't get the same kind of coverage that other institutions do. And I'll you know, Chuck mentioned uh you know, Joe Moore, and I like I like Joe. His shenanigans get front page coverage, but who's it written by? The show business reporter. Uh but nobody's taking a look at what is the quality of news that we're getting now that we have four TV news stations? What's the quality of news we're getting? What about the approach that uh uh Channel 13 or News 8 is is taking now? Is it a legitimate approach uh uh to the news? We don't look at it that way. We only look at television as as show business. We don't uh even during uh newspaper guild and uh uh negotiations, it hardly gets any ink in the newspaper whereas during Carpenters or HGEA or other union other unions uh there's all kinds of ink spilled over those negotiations. So I agree. I think there should be a lot more self-coverage and I I'll point again to the Saturday uh bulletin commentaries from the editors. I think that's a good start, but it shouldn't be where we stop.

[00:30:17] Speaker 2: Chuck, does that answer your question?

[00:30:48] Speaker 5: Yeah, and I and I just want to point out I'm sure that the advertiser editor was uh late this morning because he was out there delivering those Sunday papers.

[00:31:19] Speaker 2: Okay. Thank you, Chuck. Uh you know, Jim, listening to Tom just now, he mentioned about the the union or union contracts coming up, uh and I think even mentioned the word paranoia at one point in a different context. Maybe it's paranoia, but there's a rumor that it's not just a coincidence that you're coming from the Detroit Free Press where there is a a strike.

[00:31:50] Speaker 4: Well, I can tell you that the strike in Detroit is the most difficult thing I've ever experienced as a as a journalist, as an editor, as a manager, as a friend of journalists. Uh the issues there are very difficult, they're very protracted. I think it's going to be a a very tough course in getting them resolved in the short term. Um, but they don't involve the Honolulu Advertiser, they don't involve me. Um I don't see any issues here that remotely resembles the very difficult backshop issues that that caused that strike in Detroit. Um you're not expecting problems in negotiating a a new contract with the union here? No, I'm not. I'm expecting people to be a little uneasy as contract talks begin as they always are. I expect them to be a little uneasy as we near the expiration date of the contract. That always happens and that's understandable, we're all, we're all human beings, but I don't see any issues here that remotely resemble the situation in Detroit. I'm here for professional professional reasons, I'm not here for any other any other reasons than those.

[00:32:51] Speaker 2: Okay. Well, let's go to Bob in Pearl City. Good morning, Bob.

[00:33:22] Speaker 6: Good morning.

[00:33:53] Speaker 2: What do you have for our guest this morning?

[00:34:24] Speaker 6: Well, I have um a statement I would like to make about uh the editorial um selection of the news that they print in the advertiser in particular. Okay. Um uh they uh have uh created an impression of uh the original uh uh objections to some of the new developments in our sciences as news whereas they should have been printing the news itself. This is what you would call uh uh selective editing, I would suppose because they want to create the impression is apparently um to um favor the status quo industrial arrangements that we have in in now.

[00:34:55] Speaker 2: Bob, let me get a reaction to that first from Jim Gatti.

[00:35:25] Speaker 4: Okay. Well I think the editorial advertisers editorial page policy certainly isn't uh designed to um pursue the themes that you suggest. Uh we certainly recognize that Hawaii is is a place of change. Uh we we welcome scientific advancement. We welcome uh ideas that address the very critical uh issues of change in the economy, in the political system and in in in our culture and so forth. I'm I'm I'm a little unclear what specific editorials you may be referring to, but that certainly isn't the way I feel and not the way our editorial board feels.

[00:35:56] Speaker 2: Bob, do you have a specific example in mind?

[00:36:27] Speaker 6: Oh, yes, I have. It uh concerned uh the uh uh a misstatement actually that uh the electric cars that we are going to be having on our roads before long are um going to be fouling the environment because of the lead batteries that are going to be discarded in great numbers. And this is quite contrary to statements that uh GM Ovanic has made and uh uh it has been printed in newspapers all over the country for months previous to that time.

[00:36:58] Speaker 2: Okay. Bob, let me let me get a reaction from John Flannagan.

[00:37:29] Speaker 1: Well, I think the solution is to buy the Star-Bulletin. all across and papers across the country and it certainly is true that it's happening nationwide uh resulting from any JLA arrangement that the two things simply are connected.

[00:38:35] Speaker 2: David. John and Jim, could we have a story on the net profits of the H&A?

[00:39:11] Speaker 1: The silence is deafening. Uh the this under the current arrangement Dave, the star bulletin really doesn't even share in the net profits of the of the agency. Uh we are pretty much uh contracted to uh produce the afternoon newspaper over the next 17 years it started out as 20 uh 20 year turn starting back in 1993. And uh the Star Bulletin budget is uh contracted and indexed and uh we uh we we don't we don't uh really share in these uh these profits that you talked about um except pretty much as a a straight investment deal. Um and it's uh it's a it's a different situation uh for us. For the advertiser uh the advertiser is owned by the Ganet company which is a publicly traded company and it's uh managed pretty much uh with the interest of its stockholders and and its readers in mind and um uh I think I think if we we we turn to the the public and what they think about the newspapers, uh this profit issue is not really uh as as prominent as it is among folks who are um say in the media council or who are are are as vitally interested in in newspaper as a business as as some folks are. We are we're I was going to say, we we need to get moving because we got a number of people waiting Dave. Real quick, real quick comment. a middle of everything John, I didn't get a yes or no. I think it is $50 million. and the reason the news holds so small and we don't get the stories that the other people are talking about is because of of of that pickle. I wish you could have addressed to that the isn't the owner of the of the Star Bulletin, wasn't he the former broker for the paper change? Dave, you've made some real good points and I just have to move on and Tom Brislin, I notice you nodding that you either agree or you think it was a good question. Well, yeah, I I think it's a good question. I I think that the sale of of the advertiser to Ganet was was pretty much Ganet's lease to fee conversion uh in Hawaii. They Ganet had a tremendous interest in Hawaii, they uh they built up a a wonderful business, but they had no fee interest. They didn't own the real estate, uh they didn't really own the the the press. They owned, you know, 60% of everything and this was and as the advertiser circulation went up, this was their chance to to become established and and own the whole thing and essentially uh employ the Star Bulletin, contract them to to produce an afternoon newspaper. I'm not so so hung up on the idea of I have to know what what the profits are, but I would like to have some assurance that because they are substantial, that but that a substantial amount of it is being put back uh into the product, because I don't think if if you look at the numbers, there's there's no question that the papers here have one of the highest add to news uh ratios. that yeah, we'd like a bigger bigger news hole but the news hole of of the two papers here compared nationally uh is pretty small and uh, you know, Jim you say you'd you'd like it. Well, how do you get it? Well, one of one of the things is here in Honolulu, we have a pretty sophisticated group of folks who look at newspapers and uh I think they're used to newspapers in much larger markets and the advertiser and Star Bulletin compare pretty well to newspapers of similar circulation on the mainland that I'm familiar with. Um, when the uh ownership changed of the two papers back in 1993, uh an effort was made under the under the new ownership to increase the size of the newspaper, both newspapers. Um, and in fact, we started to do that at about the same time that this print prices doubled, um, and uh we were had to stop the kind of expansion that we expected or or hoped to make. And in the future, if those uh prices will at least stabilize and stay under control and we can afford to do it, we expect to uh to get back on track and continue to expand the size of the of the of the newspapers.

[00:39:46] Speaker 2: You're you're listening to the Price of Paradise Radio Show. We're talking about the press in Hawaii. Guests in the studio are Jim Gady, the editor of the Honolulu Advertiser, John Flanagan, the editor and publisher of the Honolulu Star Bulletin, and Tom Brislin, an associate professor of journalism at the University of Hawaii, Manoa. If you'd like to hear the show in its entirety, it'll be replayed tonight at 8:00 on KIFO 1380 AM. I've got a number of people who have been waiting patiently on the uh phone and we're going to try to get to it at least as many of them as we possibly can, and I want to leave a little bit of time to give each of you an opportunity to share any thoughts that uh that you want to share before the hour is up. So let's go very quickly to Bill in Manoa. Good morning, Bill.

[00:40:22] Speaker 3: Uh good morning. I'd like to uh shift the conversation to the the content uh of the news rather than its business aspect. The first thing is that um for example in this morning's front page, we've had a story about shopping malls and its uh attraction to the Asian uh visitor. Well, uh if you do a content analysis of the story, it's fundamental economic gossip. The sources from which uh the the the data is extracted from are basically cheerleaders for the for the local um tourist industry. Uh I'm more interested in in real hard facts and not necessarily uh what amounts to circulating uh gossip amongst uh the key economic players in tourism locally.

[00:40:58] Speaker 1: Well, let me get a quick reaction to that from Jim Gady of the advertiser. I would I would say that it's more than gossip. Those are those are people in each case who are in a position to know. They're they're in business in this uh community and have been, and they met with our editors last week and talked about this for a couple of hours. Well you should talk to you should talk to the editor, uh the same editors in Brisbane or in Sydney, uh and and other parts of of of of of Asia and the Pacific and say, well, really what what is happening there that's attracting those tourists to those areas and then get a comparison of what they have and what we have, and uh and and the dynamics of the uh of of the business end of it. The focus point of of the story isn't what makes tourists go to other places. The focus point was that the shopping component for for tourists traveling West to to East, it especially from Japan uh at at this moment is is increasing and is an opportunity uh to be seized by the business community here. I I I I think that's the point that that was made, and it's it's probably the most hopeful or optimistic conversation about the local economy uh that I've heard in in the short time I've I've been here. And and for all those reasons, I think it was a a valid story, a valid point of view, and and played in the appropriate place.

[00:42:09] Speaker 1: Yeah, I appreciate your call. We're going to try to get to the other folks who've been waiting patiently. Thank you, Bill. We go to Ray in Cappel. Good morning, Ray.

[00:42:45] Speaker 4: Ray, are you there?

[00:43:20] Speaker 1: Ray in Cappel.

[00:43:56] Speaker 4: Yes, hi. Good morning. hear me? Yes. Uh yeah. Uh I heard you guys talking about the quality of the news and uh you know a few years ago the community media council had the he a record I guess they reviewed the news media, television. I I think they did television as well as.

[00:44:31] Speaker 1: Okay. Well, let's ask Tom Brislin our journalism professor to tell us a little bit about that report and maybe update it if you can. Uh the the media council report of a of a couple of years ago uh basically involved uh asking some retired editors uh on the mainland to take a look at a number of copies of the of the two newspapers and and comment on them. Uh quite frankly, even though you've built me as an as a wonderful critic, I thought that that report was pretty ham-handed myself uh not handled very well. There were a couple good points uh the lack of coverage of Hawaiian affairs uh I think was good. And now we see uh the advertiser has one reporter who's assigned full time to covering Hawaiian issues uh and that's to me that's a that's a great improvement, but an awful lot of that criticism, that there was the old we need more investigative reporting. Well, we do have some pretty good investigative reporting in in Hawaii. Randy asking me what I like about Honolulu newspapers, I hope you're going to before the show is over. I figured the newspaper people would tell so I don't come off as a as a total curmudgeon. But I think the work that Jim Dooley does, that Ian Lynn does, that Walter Wright does when he's uh uh giving a crack at a at a good story uh is is wonderful investigative reporting. The basically, I thought that report said we wish that the dailies were like the Chicago dailies of the uh of the late 60s or or 70s because it was written by editors who were editors during that time and uh it it didn't quite reflect Hawaii, it didn't quite reflect the the realities and changing trends in in news. But another thing I I did agree with them that that we do have some columnists uh uh for both papers, but they seem to be kind of removed uh from the from the community, that we don't have, you know, kind of the city gritty sort of columnists that are really out there taking a look at at some of the more interesting and the and even the seemingly underbelly of of life in Hawaii. then an awful lot of it is just an attempts to be uh kind of a Dave Barry, a poor man's Dave Barry, or just this sort of uh you know, is an Aloha wonderful in Hawaii. And we don't we don't have a a mix of somebody who's really looking into the the local scene with with wit, and uh I I think that would be a a good addition to the newspapers as well.

[00:45:43] Speaker 1: I think Dave Shapiro's starting to do that uh which uh we felt sort of the same way. I also feel the same way about the media council report which uh as an editor I I thought was uh maybe not the most sophisticated tool in the world, but I beat my publisher up with it at the time and and I was able to hire Ian Lin because uh because of it, and uh and and use that that criticism coming from the from the community asking for uh improvements in the newspapers as a as a tool to help me try to improve the newspaper.

[00:46:18] Speaker 2: It's interesting to to hear that. We we have to move on. Ray, thank you for your call. We go to Andrew in Makiki. Good morning, Andrew.

[00:46:54] Speaker 5: Good morning. How are you? Just fine. I didn't want to cast any onus on you guys, but I do not buy your paper. I recommend people not to buy it. It's it's terrible, terrible content. For a few more pennies you can get the Wall Street Journal. I have a comment to make on one of the pictures that I saw in the paper the other day about the um that winer Texas prison guy, the black guy with the sunglasses on in your paper, who picked that picture out?

[00:47:30] Speaker 1: What are you talking about?

[00:48:05] Speaker 5: Don't don't you have anything on file with like numbers under them to make them look like the criminal that he is? You got them looking like a football player, like someone cool. You know which picture I'm talking about?

[00:48:41] Speaker 1: Uh our editors are drawing a blank here.

[00:49:16] Speaker 5: Yeah, there's a I don't know which paper because both papers are the same. Okay. As far as I'm concerned, it's it's a monopoly and the content is garbage. but this I I flip through there. I don't buy it. I I try and find it from somebody else. I I make it a point not to buy it.

[00:49:52] Speaker 1: Okay. Andrew, thank you for your call. We really appreciate it.

[00:50:28] Speaker 5: Can you comment on that? Neither one recalls it, Andrew. It was about the guy in Texas that complains all the time about being in prison there. There they're just they're drawing a blank here Andrew. I appreciate your call but we have to move on.

[00:51:03] Speaker 1: Former advertiser reader, clearly. Uh we go to we have uh from Honolulu on line four. Good morning Ajuk.

[00:52:15] Speaker 6: Good morning. I'd like to make a correction to Tom Brislin's evaluation of the Media Council's study on the newspapers. Uh we not only did uh have the comments of five national editors. We all what we did was we polled 250 movers and shakers. We polled all the neighborhood boards, we took uh five 10 publications of comparable comparable size and measured the news hole. So it was not only the comments of five national newspaper editors. Ajuk, let me let me ask you, do you think and just you know real quickly, do you think the newspapers have improved over the three years since the Media Council issued that report? No, I'm very disappointed in both of them. In fact, I was thinking of canceling one of my subscription. Okay. Well, we appreciate your call. Thank you. Uh we go to Jean in Caimuki. Good morning, Jean.

[00:52:50] Speaker 7: Yes, to get back to your basic question when you first started off, I think the reason people are turned off newspapers is because of local pieces have no news. And this respects I agree with Andrew, David and Ajuk. The priorities that you choose to put on the front page and that you choose to emphasize are just based on sensationalism. I mean I know it's cheaper to hire reporters who are less qualified, you can get them cheaper than good reporters who will really do in-depth reporting and do in-depth analysis and hit the issues, but we we the state is bereft of in-depth national and international news. Let me get a reaction to that, Jean. I think I think that it's the papers are responsible for the widespread ignorance in the state.

[00:53:26] Speaker 1: Okay. Let's get a reaction to that. Uh first John Flanagan, then uh Jim Gady and if we could keep it short so that you guys have time to have some concluding remarks. Well, I have to take uh these comments as a vote for more international and and national news. Um the and and what I hear from people who criticize the newspapers, I I I I take their comments to heart, and uh but I also have to weigh them against the comments of thousands and thousands of other people I've heard from. Um the newspaper did a actually the newspapers didn't do a survey that the Simmons uh company did a survey of of uh several hundred adults on Oahu in 1994, and they looked at how people thought of 61 major companies in the in the in the state. And uh it was very interesting to me because I I hear from a lot of folks like our callers who have a lot of negative things to say about the newspapers and I sometimes it it's it's a little hard to uh to think that we're doing much of a job at all. But the Simmons study was really really fascinating in that out of of these 61 companies, the newspapers were in the top five for being trustworthy, honest, reliable, being good values, being concerned about the environment. And uh believe it or not, uh people across Oahu anyway, feel that the Star Bulletin is 42nd out of 61 in it in its profit orientation. Uh something that my bosses have accused me of uh over the years over and over again. So I I think uh the criticism is is uh is uh is certainly very well-intentioned, well thought of uh thought out and uh and to a large extent very valid. But overall, I think uh most people feel that newspapers are in fact uh are pretty good value and they're good quality. Uh the the of the all the companies in Hawaii that were were surveyed here, uh the in terms of the quality issue, the newspapers were in the top 10.

[00:54:37] Speaker 1: John, let let me ask Jim Gady, you you raise this Simmons study and I don't know anything about it, but in preparing for this show I talked to a number of people and and one person commented that evidently a recent Simmons study concluded that last year, and I think it was the advertiser, had lost a phenomenal number of readers and I assume that this isn't unique to the advertiser. I assume that this is part of this concern about people not reading as much as as they used to. Jim Gady, is is there truth to to what I heard about a large number of readers being lost in the last year, according to the Simmons study?

[00:55:13] Speaker 1: Well, not certain if if it's true or not. The Simmons study that that you're referring to has been corrected and changed and amended at least twice now and some of the some of the uh variables that that were used were found to be uh uh imperfect or or flawed or uh balanced in the wrong way. wasn't it something like 50 or 60,000 readers, they said in one year. Readers as opposed to subscribers. I'm not sure what that number was. Um and and it's it's gone back again for review by by Simmons and and by our own marketing people. So, it's it's sort of unclear what that will finally say, uh because it's changed twice already. it's sort of leaves me wondering about what we'll ever be able to conclude from it.

[00:55:48] Speaker 1: Okay. Well, we're down to just the last few minutes and uh I apologize to the folks who've been waiting patiently on the line. We're just not going to be able to get to you because I want to give each of the guests in the studio a minute or so to add anything that needs to be added to the conversation or emphasize something that you want to emphasize. Let's start with Tom Brislin. Well let me let me pick up Randy what I was was saying before what I like about the uh newspapers. I I find the editorial writing uh to be remarkably good and the the selection of of subjects, selection of commentary to be very good. I think the advertiser's money section has uh done wonderful things especially now that it's it used to be kind of a pinstripe uh you know, Bishop Street sort of publication just for for business folks. Now with things like Tom Kaiser's stories about the workplace, these stories are beginning to have meaning uh to regular reading readers. I think both papers do very well in court reporting and I think the feature section of the Star Bulletin uh has improved greatly over the last uh couple of years. What I'd like to see uh just going over some of the points, one again is is more self coverage. I'd like someone to say if if Joe Moore can put himself inside a movie with John Wayne or Clint Eastwood as a as a ploy to get us to switch to channel two, uh how believable is the video than that that we see on TV news shows. I mean some someone should be raising these questions about the media as as institution the line between The line between fact and fiction Fact and fiction, news and entertainment, uh etc.

[00:57:00] Jim Gatti: The thing I'd like to see is more context. Uh, going back to what John said uh about the Eagles, I read all those stories. I'm a baby boomer too. But I think the Eagles story gave us more context about this group and why they were making a comeback and why it was a big thing for Hawaii than most political stories. So I'd like to see uh, I I don't quibble with the facts that are presented, but I think that we need a lot more context to help us interpret those facts so that we can do our part as a responsible citizenry.

[00:57:46] Randall Roth: Okay. Jim Gaddy, concluding remarks.

[00:58:09] Jim Gatti: It's always good to hear what what readers have to say. It's it's it's my experience that most readers tend to uh evaluate the entire paper based on their own personal subject areas that they that they like the most. Uh, national news was one that was mentioned, business news, the gentleman who prefers the Wall Street Journal. Um, but it's it's been my experience here that that I'm finding uh community acceptance and uh um, reliance on and confidence in in these two papers, very high. Um, and the uh research in uh done by Gaddy in in that area shows that they're fairly consistent with uh markets across the country. Uh what we're going through now at the advertiser is a sort of uh internal review of everything that goes on at the paper, every page, every section, uh with the view of trying to be all things to all people. Very hard to do, but uh I I think we're on the on the right track and I hope readers uh pay attention to what will be happening in the next few months.

[00:58:56] Randall Roth: Okay. John Flanagan.

[00:59:19] John Flanagan: Um, well I I've got a a list now of things that uh Tom Brislin has uh has uh thought about that that we ought to try to do to the newspaper. And uh and I have a a a list back at the office that I add to every day as people contact me, give me a call, tell me what they think. And uh I I think we've uh taken a lot of these suggestions to heart and made a lot of changes in the newspapers, and we'll continue to make changes, and continue to try to stay uh at pace and and uh up with uh Hawaii and its needs.

[00:59:42] Randall Roth: The music says it's time to go. Thank you very much. John Flanagan, the editor and publisher of the Honolulu Star Bulletin, Jim Gaddy, the editor of the Honolulu Advertiser, and Tom Brislin, associate professor of journalism at the University of Hawaii at Manoa. Uh next week we're going to be talking about the West Oahu campus. Attorney General Margery Bronster and some of the DeCroy and economists in the University of Hawaii will be here and we think either Ken Mortimer or Joe Blanco as well. You've been listening to Pop Radio. I'm Randy Roth. Aloha.