A big "thank-you" for failing to do the impossible

Barbara Roessner is out at the Courant for taking on the thankless and impossible task of plugging a leak in the Titanic. She couldn't fix the thing that the owners and publishers had ruined, so she's off the plank without a snorkel. Let's hope, for her sake, that when she took on a job that had "failure" printed all over it in banner 200 point type, that she made a deal for a financial lifeboat. It's no consolation that the entire enterprise seems to be taking on water faster than anyone can bail.

I was among the early dissenters who felt that by rejiggering the layout, printing more and bigger pictures, and re-focusing the stories so that they all took on the soft blur of TV news that the Courant would be alienating their base - people like me who still like to read a daily - and not gaining any new readers because those readers aren't interested in a newspaper.

It didn't take a genius to see that the goal was Quixotic and that Roessner's was tilting at windmills. The owners and publishers had already stripped all that was good and attractive about the paper (good reporters, town coverage, columnists), and expected readers to shout "hurrah" because the logo slid into the gutter, and we could read advertisements for Foxwoods on page 1.

In short, corporate leveraging of healthy papers has driven them to the brink of extinction. Some notable dailies have already stepped into the abyss.

And now, a new knight in shining armor, former top salesman Richard Graziano, rides over the hill, from, of all places, a Fox New affiliate. Of course, Fox 61 is not Fox News, but there is an affiliation with the network which brings us Hannity, O'Reilly, Beck and Cavuto. Be prepared for a dose of "fair and balanced," along with celebs stories, and cute baby animal photos.

While publisher Graziano's background is sales, he recently appointed Jeff Levine, who ran two news dot coms in Florida, as combined managing editor of Fox 61 and the Courant. You can see a sample of his work here.

And so Roessner, and Cliff Teutsch are out the door and we are about to see a formerly great daily take the backseat to a superficial local news broadcast, and a website that promises fabulous party recipes.

The Hartford Courant, a bad haircut

I heard Courant managing editor, Barbara Roessner on the radio this morning, and as she recited the reasons why the Courant has redesigned it's print edition (the world is changing, competition for breaking news with the internet, readers with less time), she seemed a little jaded, maybe even bored - as if she'd recited this list several times over the past couple of weeks, and didn't quite believe it herself anymore. (She didn't mention Sam Zell once.)

Roessner, who in managing the redesign, has responded dutifully to a hopeless and thankless task. But she used the words "taut" and "dense" to describe the redesigned daily.

I think the words I would use are "garish" and "shallow."

I still can't understand why a newspaper would redesign itself so that people like me, longtime subscribers, who like to read a substantial paper, would feel disappointed and alienated. At the same time, the Courant seems to be appealing more to a younger, internet reader who will never approach an honor box, a newstand, or god forbid, fill in a subscription application. Maybe I should simply go each day where the print edition seems to point me - to the internet version of the paper.

The new Courant seems to be designed for people who don't like to read newspapers. Maybe who don't like to read at all. If the New York Times is a newspaper, the "new" Courant is a bad PowerPoint presentation - outlines, tidbits, photos, graphs, illustrations, sub-heads, call-outs, all crammed onto some very busy, very jammed pages.

I was really interested in reading the front-page story about Chris Dodd, but I found it strangely difficult to make my way through. Do I really want some sub-head writer telling me every three paragraphs what I'm about to read?

As for the front page illustration of Dodd (there he is in all his impressionistic triple-chinned glory), I can't imagine it will sell many papers. If it's front-page, magazine appeal, the Courant is going to have to go with someone like Hillary Duff, and forget the senior Senator from our state. And Lord help us then.

I've said in a previous post that the Reader Speak headlines seem to pander to the kind of online readership which consists of lurkers, looking to spew some anonymously vile epithet. A thoughtful reader comment, will not necessarily be expressed as a single-sentence reflection. So what we'll get is neither the ugly insult, nor the considered opinion, but something in between - a short, tedious, pedestrian, anonymous blurb like "His character was in contrast to the selfishness that is so common today, and which has cause our economic situation." So, who the hell cares, except the person being quoted.

As for news, or lack thereof, it's already obvious that there will be less of it all way round. Less international, less national, less local. And what we do get will be condensed, digested and served in an easy-to-read fashion. I spent 20 minutes with the Sunday Courant. Less time with today's. I've got time on my hands that I'll spend at HuffingtonPost, nytimes.com and Salon.

While there's precious little in the way of story on the front page (3 by my count), page 2 and 3 actually begin to look like a newspaper worth reading. But from pages 4-9, where, based on a four-column model, there appears to be 480 column inches, there are, in fact, about 72 inches of news copy, and a whopping 408 inches of advertisements. That should make the ad department very happy, if the surfeit of ads doesn't drive circulation down.

Oddly, the copy-heavy ad for the Amish no-flue fireplace mantle, in Sunday's Courant, was almost as interesting a read as any of the stories in that section (and greater in depth).

The rest of the paper is just as distressing - the lack of distinguishable state and town section, the appearance of classifieds on page 2 of the CTLIVING section, the constant reference to things not in the paper but on the web (does anyone really believe that someone moves easily from a printed reference, to an internet site?), an editorial page diminished by half, and a lot of news written by non-state residents.

Coincidentally, my subscriber invoice arrived in the mail the day before the "new" Courant hit my doorstep. Before I mail it in, I want to be sure that these first few days are not an indication where the paper will end up.

Maybe, like a bad haircut, it will grow out.

Here's my suggestion. All Courant writers and editors, grab your clippings and leave your desks now. Rendez-vous at the Red Rock. Write a declaration of independence in the form of a business plan. Put up a couple grand apiece and start a new Connecticut online news site. Beat the new Courant at its own game. There are stories to be written. Ads to be sold. Pocket the money that's going to Zell.

The amazing shrinking Courant

I don't envy The Hartford Courant's managing editor, Barbara Roessner. As the architect of the "new" Hartford Courant, she is, and will be, the target of scorn from readers and reporters alike. If Roessner pulls off the transformation of the Courant, she will be acclaimed a genius, but the odds are against her. Those who do feel that if anyone has a chance, Roessner, who is reportedly smart, tough, shrewd and creative, likely does.

In her column today about the changes to come, Roessner explains the uphill battle she faces, with a sense of humor, and a sense of what's possible given the resources she'll have at her disposal. In addition, she's sizing up her options, considering an alternative career as a Vermont bartender if the Courant thing doesn't work out. By the way Barbara, it'll be the rare bar in Vermont where you'll be asked to mix a Goombay Smash.

On the positive side, the folks at the Courant likely understand that there will not be an immediate mass exodus of readers since the paper is still considered a daily must by thousands of readers across the state, as the states's paper of record. Still, as the Courant realizes, readership of the print edition continues to shrink. What they need to consider as well, is the fate of The New Haven Register, and it's associated papers, all of which were well-read until a corporate right-sizing reshaped those papers into rags that readers walked away from in droves. On the other hand, the Courant should consider successful independent dailies like Manchester's Journal Inquirer, which has maintained its readership by providing local news and insightful state reporting.

As a longtime reader, I can't say I'm thrilled with some of the other projections of what will happen at the paper.

Right now, the first section, the A section of the paper is the most read piece. The Courant plans to reshape that section, but it's time to ask the question "if it ain't broken, why fix it?" By ridding the section of national and international news the Courant seems to be pandering to a dumbed-down audience, when, in fact, the people who are currently reading are not of the "dumbed-down" variety. The people who are not reading the paper may fit that definition, but it's unlikely that the Courant is going to convince the non-reader to suddenly pick up a paper.

What will happen, of course, is that the Courant will be sending us elsewhere - the New York Times, for example - to read national and international stories. How does it help the Courant to send readers like me elsewhere?

Elsewhere in section A, we'll find the stories which formerly appeared in the "Connecticut" section. As a born skeptic, it leads me to surmise that I'll find more stories in that section about towns which I don't care to read about, and less stories about the town in which I live.

Business news will also move into the A section, though I understand that the Courant will abandon its print version of stock prices and sports scores. It's an old axiom, I know, but it's been said that people pick up a paper for the obituaries and the sports scores. Sure, the online scores, and stock reports, are more current (no pun intended), but the Courant seems to be cutting off its nose, etc.

Another new element of the paper will be shorter stories, more "bulleted" stories, and more charts, grafts and statistics, which will replace full-length stories. For the Courant's information, I come to newspapers for depth. I hate USA Today for it's lack of depth. If I want headlines, and soundbites, I'll turn on the local radio news, or God forbid, the local TV news. Again, the Courant seems to be turning its back on its core readership to try to seduce the non-reader, who, I hate to say, will never darken the door of an honor box.

As for iTowns, the pitful weekly review of town stories (what person, who hasn't read the original story, actually will want to read the encapsulated version, and what person who has already read the original, gives a shit that it's printed again), I say ditch it. As I wrote a few days ago, you want me to write the news and then pay to read it? Not likely.

The Courant's predicament is, unfortunately, a direct result of the Sam Zell deal. He was allowed to broker the future health of the paper (and don't be misled, without the debt saddling the Courant because of the deal, the paper could make millions every year), for his own benefit. I think Zell should have stuck to real estate, then again, there ain't much money to be made there these days.

The Courant cannot afford to continue to shed its best, and only asset, it's knowledgeable, experienced writers, editors and photographers, and expect to keep readers who understand the value of a newspaper.

I'm with Colin McEnroe. I think the best writers and editors should take the early retirement package and severance and start an online state news website that will give the "new" Courant a run for its money.

Good luck Barbara, but rest assured, a shot and a beer are easy to serve up.