# Everything Else > Arts & Entertainment >  Daily Oklahoman

## FFLady

Anyone notice paying $2 for the Sunday print instead of $1.50???  In a way, if I quit buying the paper, I lose out on the coupons. Yes, most can be printed on-line, but I shop at Crest in Edmond, and they do not accept those coupons....

My Monday dilema......

----------


## Steve

Stick with us! I promise I'll keep providing you interesting things to read.
 :Smile: 
-Steve

----------


## so1rfan

I quit taking the DO about six months ago (or more) after being a subscriber for 15+ years. Main reason was to save money. I get more news from the internet anyways and found myself reading it less and less.

Sad to say, I haven't missed it. And from looks of the occasional copy I pick up when at my parents, I'm not missing a whole lot. It seems like now there is no substance to it at all. 

However, if you do the math, spending $2 to get coupons that can save you more money makes good sense. (or cents).

Sorry Steve, I know that's not something you want to hear about but unfortunately shrinking circulation is a worldwide trend.

----------


## AFCM

> Stick with us! I promise I'll keep providing you interesting things to read.
> 
> -Steve


I think a little investigative journalism can keep the Daily Oklahoman afloat, but I doubt such will ever happen.  I don't subscribe to *The Oklahoman* because the majority of what is written lacks objectivity.  Even when a story comes out with substance, it is typically several days behind the AP or OKCTalk.  

For example, I've started two threads, with media confirmation, detailing a possible move of an aircraft manufacturing plant to Oklahoma City and Tinker's probable aquisition of the GM plant.  It was several days to weeks before the DOK picked up on these stories, for whatever reasons.  To piggyback on my experience, I'm sure others have posted media-confirmed or reliable information here, only to find the DOK reporting the story nearly a week later.

I'm not trying to be cynical.  Rather, I'm simply stating my reasons for not subscribing to the DOK and hope the organization can benefit from everyone's criticism before it's too late.  I have no problem paying for my news as long as I have a reason to do so.  It's the job of journalists to furnish that reason and earn my subscription.  Steve, I've enjoyed your commentary here.  Please accept my response as constructive.

----------


## Steve

Such criticism is needed. But I'm not sure it's always warranted. There is talk in the industry about experimenting with a one-week blackout where free access to all online newspaper sites is cut off just to see how the public, the blogs and chat sites might fare without them.
I'm not advocating either way on that. Newspapers do need to change how they go about delivering the news. But I can't accept that relying simply on blogs and forums is a good thing. I don't believe that Pete would say that would be a good thing.
This country will, if left without fulltime professional journalists, be much poorer for it.

----------


## Steve

"The agony in the world of print journalism is very great. The scale of its business must adjust to the Starbucks world, and to an age in which snippets may be freely copied as never before. Once they do, however, their future once again will be bright. And society will enjoy plenty of competition from the blogosphere, even in one-paper towns. What comes after a golden age?  A much more complicated world."
To read why the author makes this conclusion, read "What Comes After the Golden Age" by David Warsh at Economic Principals  Blog Archive  What Comes After a Golden Age?

----------


## Buickcarnut

Anybody also notice how the Oklahoman publishes a full page ad on Sunday and then a quarter page ad on Monday poking fun at the Fox station as to facts and journalism? I'm assuming it had to do with the series that Fox was doing last week. For the record, I like watching Fox 25's and Channel 9's news.

I thought Fox did a nice series piece last week showing that alot of college students (OU) are still entering into the journalism career, (newspaper, print, tv and cable) even though, their has been decreasing levels of readers at the papers and media outlets with the downturn in the economy.

I guess the Oklahoman didn't appreciate Fox bringing that story to light, that readership has eroded away due to the net, but I think they can look at themselves as to why readership has fallen....

----------


## metro

> Such criticism is needed. But I'm not sure it's always warranted. There is talk in the industry about experimenting with a one-week blackout where free access to all online newspaper sites is cut off just to see how the public, the blogs and chat sites might fare without them.
> I'm not advocating either way on that. Newspapers do need to change how they go about delivering the news. But I can't accept that relying simply on blogs and forums is a good thing. I don't believe that Pete would say that would be a good thing.
> This country will, if left without fulltime professional journalists, be much poorer for it.


IMO, that would be the nail in the coffin for the newspaper industry. Enough valid information is leaked on the internet without newspapers. No offense as you know I enjoy your articles. W/O the print media, the sources would just leak more info to the internet instead of going to newspaper for exclusives or to break the news first. Same goes with press releases, they'd just be sent out to sites like this instead.

On the bright side, if they did that and came back, it would give the Oklahoman enough time to have a paper with more content as it should every day.

----------


## TaoMaas

> Newspapers do need to change how they go about delivering the news. But I can't accept that relying simply on blogs and forums is a good thing.


  I worry about blogs becoming our sole source of information, too.  Unfortunately, I think it's going to be one of those cases of we won't know how good we had it until our traditional media outlets are gone and there's no real accountability left.

----------


## FFLady

I saw that Buick....I also watch Fox news - I'm not sure why DOK used a dunce cap for their "ad", as I thought Fox was merely reporting the fact that jounalism students must now also look toward other avenues for reporting/writing, due to internet use. Personally, I perfer DOK's news in print, versus their website, but that's another poll. It's kinda like the post office raising the price of stamps to keep up with costs, even though more and more people shop on-line. Not sure what DOK's reasoning was for raising the price of the paper, one would think to lower it, to keep the readers....?

----------


## AFCM

> This country will, if left without fulltime professional journalists, be much poorer for it.


Unless full-time professional journalists for *The Oklahoman* become active in their approach to reporting news, I'm afraid they may be overestimating their worth to the average person.  It seems the DOK columnists have become content with sitting back and reporting press releases or stories that other agencies have already disclosed.  This passive approach to newsgathering is analogous to a typical high school student rehashing the same old science fair project that has been done time and time again.  While the concept behind the project may be scientifically accurate, it does nothing to bolster the body of knowledge that currently exists within the field.  While insightful for a few, the student's work is completely disposable because it consists of no original research - and understandably so.

If DOK journalists wait to receive a press release from organizations before publishing a story, how are they contributing anything original and noteworthy to the Information Age?  The same question can be posed for reporters who publish already-disclosed information from other reporting agencies.  If I can obtain the same news from other sources, what reason do I have to consistently rely on *The Daily Oklahoman*?  Heck, anyone can report information once it's been confirmed by others; *metro* does it all of the time. For a group of people who are paid to report new information to the masses, the journalists for the DOK sure are passive and vulnerable to committing grammatical and factual errors.  Again, I'm not trying to be harsh.  I just don't feel *The Daily Oklahoman* has done enough to earn my subscription.

----------


## AFCM

> Such criticism is needed. But I'm not sure it's always warranted. There is talk in the industry about experimenting with a one-week blackout where free access to all online newspaper sites is cut off just to see how the public, the blogs and chat sites might fare without them.


I think the blogs and chat sites will adapt accordingly.  Remember, stories that are typically reported in _The Daily Oklahoman_ have already made the rounds on other media outlets and online.  Of course, the DOK could conduct some original investigative reporting and ensure the people with a desire-to-know have a source to satisfy their inquisitive minds.  Even when stories have not been disclosed by reporting agencies, reliable information can _sometimes_ be obtained from blogs and chat sites.  Subsequent publications by news agencies only confirm what has already been disseminated by freelance writers or bloggers.  Of course, questions of credibility will arise, but things will find a way of working themselves out in the end.  To summarize and make things more simple, I just want the paid journalists to take a more active approach to reporting news, much like a blogger.

----------


## gmwise

> Such criticism is needed. But I'm not sure it's always warranted......But I can't accept that relying simply on blogs and forums is a good thing.....
> This country will, if left without fulltime professional journalists, be much poorer for it.


The local media as far I have seen and watch has been devoid of any "fulltime professional journalists"??!.
The DO has been full of BS for a looong time.
Small town newspapers I would hope could survive, but even now theres some local papers in OKC are thriving.

----------


## gmwise

> ... Not sure what DOK's reasoning was for raising the price of the paper, one would think to lower it, to keep the readers....?


It cost alot of money to keep CB a billionaire, and keep his NBA hobby going.
Not to mention all the city/state officials and legislators fully bribed.

----------


## USG '60

I have to wonder if the price of paper is really the issue.  I have subscribed to the Sunday Oklahoman all my adult life and a long time ago, I would subscribe to one of the dailies (Times or Oklahoman) but I haven't for many years.  They have tried several times in the last few years to get me hooked on the daily version by giving it to me free for several months.  But now I have been receiving the daily for free for nearly a year.  If the price of paper is that high then WHY are they giving it away.  All I really do with the dailies is check to see if I am in the obits and when I see I lived another day, I roll it back up and throw it away.

----------


## flintysooner

I subscribe to The Oklahoman on my Kindle through Amazon.  It is $5.99 per month.  I usually read it every morning first thing.  Doesn't matter where I am but when I turn the Kindle on the paper shows up in a minute or so.  I had missed the paper but had not realized how much until I began reading it again.

And, by the way, the K2 is awesome.

----------


## PennyQuilts

I've got the original Kindle and love it.  I am sure the K2 is even better.   The last I checked, the DO was not available and I am tickled to learn that they've added it.  I will check that out. Thanks.

----------


## flintysooner

> I've got the original Kindle and love it.  I am sure the K2 is even better.   The last I checked, the DO was not available and I am tickled to learn that they've added it.  I will check that out. Thanks.


I tried a couple of other papers on the Kindle and didn't enjoy them but The Oklahoman I do enjoy.  The K2 has an improved navigation system for newspapers.  

I gave my old Kindle to another family member and we share the same library at Amazon.  We're both voracious readers and enjoy similar material so it works great for us.

----------


## Lauri101

I guess I'm in the minority here, but I subscibe to both daily and Sunday Oklahoman.  I think the DOK has shown some improvement over the years and will probably continue to subscribe.

As others have said - print journalism as a career is in dire need of investigators, not reporters.  I started out as a journalism major in college and worked on our school paper. We snooped shamelessly and although our investigations may not have reached national security levels, we did uncover some fraternity test-copying operations and other 1970s era college scandals.

I like the feel of newsprint.  I like reading each article, record and obit.  I like having the crossword puzzle in a meeting, folded in my binder. 
Plus, my geriatric cat prefers newspaper instead of litter - so I recycle!

----------


## TaoMaas

> As others have said - print journalism as a career is in dire need of investigators, not reporters.


  Investigative journalism costs money because you have to be able to cut that reporter free to pursue the story for days...weeks...or maybe months.  There's just not enough income anymore to be able to do that as often as in the past and still fill a daily paper.  I think it's that "daily paper" thing that is the key to this.  There's too few resources with too much space to fill so the more labor intensive activities get dropped by the wayside.

----------


## Midtowner

I think I'm most upset about the editorial page.  Tort reform is an issue which is fairly near and dear to my heart.  There are arguments against and for it, this I know.  The content of the editorial page, however, has been extremely misleading if not outright demonstrably false.  Why would anyone want to pay for editorial content which was merely dishonestly shilling for the insurance industry?

----------


## drumsncode

The Oklahoman is angry at Channel 25 at The Lost Ogle

For all of you who don't watch FOX25, get on board!  It's 5 times better than it was in 2003.  If you saw it last night, you know why.  They're even so good now that they angered a newspaper! ;-)

----------


## FFLady

I saw that Drum - I was left wondering why the DOK took such offense to the previous story. I didn't think the story was negatively reported against the darling newspaper...? Someone musta' been having a bad day there - lol. Even Mark Shannon said it was childish. (if that matters)

----------


## Pete

I've posted on this subject many times and plan to write a series about new media, citizen journalism and traditional media outlets.

But here's the crux:  The traditional newspaper is just about the only place that actually does real, fact-checked reporting.  This has not changed.  What has changed is that the major sources of income for print news (classifieds and commercial ads) are actually better suited (and have been running) to electronic media, so the newsrooms continue to be slashed.

But the paradox is that there are exponentially more outlets these days.  Just one generation ago, there were only 3 TV outlets for news in Oklahoma City, each doing a half an hour two or three times a day.  That's a total of 8 to 10 hours of daily news time.

The amount just being broadcast on TV now is almost incalcuable.  Thousands and thousands of hours every single day -- just on TV!  When you add in things like the internet, radio and other mediums...  You soon realize everyone is talking but almost no one is REPORTING.

Yes, there is a place for bloggers, message board posters and citizen journalists.  But almost every topic starts with some sort of reliable REPORT, and that almost always comes from a newspaper writer.

I've said many times that I have great admiration for the way the Oklahoman has changed over the last 20 years.  It was one of the very first papers to be on the web, has it's entire archives available electronically, produces lots of video and podcasts, has several adjunct blogs, and many different electronic formats (Kindle, mobile, etc.).

It's never been a place where a lot of investigative journalism happens, but that's typical in smaller markets.  They DO do a very good job with local business and sports reporting, and those are the things are are truly unique to the area that almost no one else covers.

It's clear to me the traditional reporter still has a very valuable place -- maybe more now than ever.  But what I think will happen is that those jobs will start to shift to other types of media businesses, which to this point have been taking advantage of the news without having to pay people to research and write it.

----------


## TaoMaas

> It's clear to me the traditional reporter still has a very valuable place -- maybe more now than ever.  But what I think will happen is that those jobs will start to shift to other types of media businesses, which to this point have been taking advantage of the news without having to pay people to research and write it.


I totally agree.  News isn't dying...it's evolving.  Now, if I could just figure out "evolving into WHAT?", I could probably retire on the value of that information. lol

----------


## BDP

I think people want something revealing from the information sources for which they pay. They now see public information as a commodity that has little to no street value. If they're going to pay for it, they want something more in depth brought to them with a unique insight from qualified writers who they feel are working for them and for the public at large. If anything, the real problem with print media is not its medium, but the fact that it has become more and more transparent that the publications are at least equal part publicity instruments for their corporate parents as they are sources of unbiased information with a sense of obiligation to serve the populace. I think, to many, paying for the manipulation just gets old, especially when, at worst, they can get manipulated on the internet for free.

So, it seems more and more the real VALUE to many subscribing to the paper has become not the information, but the coupons. Seriously. Sure, for some they just like consuming their information in print, as it is more convenient to them. But that's not really a qualitative endorsement of the content.




> Of course, questions of credibility will arise


Credibility should always be questioned and it's actually good that many seem to approach things they read on the internet with skepticism. However, media do not have credibility issues, sources do. This is what kills me about the old information establishment. They talk about the internet as if the _medium_ itself is misleading, which is impossible and they act like no one will ever lie in print or if it has their "name" attached to it. That's just bogus rhetoric from a panicked industry that is just as willing to spin it for us as any anonymous blogger.

As has been pointed out many times, there are tons of sources on the internet that are every bit as credible as what you get in a newspaper. Sure some question the anonymity attached to a lot of online sources, but sometimes, the anonymity actually helps the source avoid possible negative repercussion, allowing them to provide more unbiased and relevant information. There is absolutely no difference between that and when an anonymous source is quoted in print in terms of the reliability of that information.

As for the Oklahoman, it seems to be putting a lot of energy in its non-traditional media. It seems to pay a lot of attention to its website and has a mobile site when many top national papers do not. But clearly, it's not the medium that's the problem for those who do not subscribe or who have canceled. It's the content. Representatives from and analysts of print media keep saying the sky is falling and that information in print is the only way we can get reliable information consistently. Unfortunately, they are proven wrong time and time again, yet seem to think that using the jedi mind trick on us will work better than adapting.

So, it's not print _media_ that is turning people off, it's the fact that papers just don't really provide much new or revealing information anymore. They have more resources and contacts to be more relevant than tons of information websites, but they have chosen to be less aggressive over the last 20 years or so, leaving an information void that, unfortunately for them, they created right about the same time the internet was becoming a information tool for the masses. They kind of want to pass it off that the internet killed them and we're stupid for using the internet for information, but their complacency, created in large part by corporate consolidation, is just as much to blame.

The Oklahoman is kind of old school, though, in that it's not so much acting on behalf of a corporation, as many papers are these days, as it is trying to serve a specific point of view and protect the friends of the paper. It's a very activist paper in terms of politics, religion, lifestyle, etc., which is fine, but it just needs to stop acting like it isn't or that I HAVE to pay them for it or I will have no idea what is going on in the world. No one believes that, except maybe some of the sales people that call me every few months.

----------


## TaoMaas

> ...they have chosen to be less aggressive over the last 20 years or so, leaving an information void that, unfortunately for them, they created right about the same time the internet was becoming a information tool for the masses. They kind of want to pass it off that the internet killed them and we're stupid for using the internet for information, but their complacency, created in large part by corporate consolidation, is just as much to blame.



I don't agree with this at all.  I think the erosion started with the 24 hr cable news channels and then really moved into high gear with the internet.

----------


## Centerback

> I saw that Drum - I was left wondering why the DOK took such offense to the previous story. I didn't think the story was negatively reported against the darling newspaper...? Someone musta' been having a bad day there - lol. *Even Mark Shannon said it was childish.* (if that matters)



Now that's rich...pot and kettle anyone?

----------


## BDP

> I don't agree with this at all. I think the erosion started with the 24 hr cable news channels and then really moved into high gear with the internet.


So, you do agree with it a little.

Just kidding. 

I think you're right, but I also think cable news has eroded as well and they don't even have coupons to make up for it.

----------


## TaoMaas

> So, you do agree with it a little.
> 
> Just kidding. 
> 
> I think you're right, but I also think cable news has eroded as well and *they don't even have coupons to make up for it.*



LOL  I think it's a "chicken or the egg" deal.  To me, it seemed like it started when the traditional news outlets lost their monopoly on the viewership.  That meant less money, which meant fewer resources for the papers/tv stations, which meant decreased content, which cost them viewers, which meant less money, which meant fewer resources, etc...

----------


## metro

BDP, well said above, especially this part:




> I think people want something revealing from the information sources for which they pay. They now see public information as a commodity that has little to no street value. If they're going to pay for it, they want something more in depth brought to them with a unique insight from qualified writers who they feel are working for them and for the public at large.


There are several local reporters that are still valuable to their organization (Lackmeyer comes to mind), but these are few and far between, and not enough to convince me to purchase a subscription, for something I can usually break the lead on and verify the source before the media does. I want and am willing to pay for content that I cannot get and verify as a "citizen journalist."

----------


## Steve

Thanks Pete.

----------


## BDP

> It's clear to me the traditional reporter still has a very valuable place -- maybe more now than ever.


This is very true. It just seems that many papers don't realize just what their real value is to the consumer. Many seem to be more interested in chasing market share in the new media world, instead of solidifying their position as the best source for investigative and verified information. This may be true for most major news outlets these days.

I think many people want to know what is _really_ going on, instead of just being handed a press release. As papers cut their newsrooms and staff down, they lose the human resources that do the digging and actually put themselves in a position to simply be publicity outlets. So then we're stuck with pre-packaged information from papers, and the questioning is left up to the masses on the net who often don't have the resources to get any real answers.

The irony is that traditional media, now more than ever, have immediate access to their potential market and can find out what questions their readers have on a given topic. However, it still seems like they view any and all discourse that takes place in the digital medium as insignificant and are more focused on speciously discrediting it, than actually mining it for topics in a way that could actually help them create a product that people are interested in buying.

----------


## Steve

BDP, you need to be communicating this sort of thought to the folks in charge. If you want more than just press releases and briefs, speak out! I plead with those of you who are readers, don't let the consultants and focus groups be the only voices heard.

----------


## metro

BDP, I agree with everything you've said thus far on the topic.

And Steve, I've emailed Ed Kelly my thoughts, but he obviously doesn't listen. Tell him to read OKCTalk and actually listen to it.

----------


## Lauri101

> snip...
> And Steve, I've emailed Ed Kelly my thoughts, but he obviously doesn't listen. Tell him to read OKCTalk and actually listen to it.


Ditto - I could wallpaper my living room with my letters to the editor - not one has been published and only a few even acknowledged.  

Looking back though, I have noticed that at least we do see some content on the op-ed page that is not all the way to the right.  I'd like to see more centrist views personally.

BDP - I echo your comments also.

----------


## westsidesooner

> I guess I'm in the minority here, but I subscibe to both daily and Sunday Oklahoman.  I think the DOK has shown some improvement over the years and will probably continue to subscribe.
> 
> As others have said - print journalism as a career is in dire need of investigators, not reporters. 
> 
> I like the feel of newsprint.  I like reading each article, record and obit.  I like having the crossword puzzle in a meeting, folded in my binder. 
> Plus, my geriatric cat prefers newspaper instead of litter - so I recycle!


I meant to post on this issue earlier but like everything else it got put on the back burner.  When I read about the Seattle paper going online only it reminded me about this thread.  

I don't subscribe to the DOK anymore, but still get the Oklahoman and the USA every day at the newstand.  I'd have them delivered but the paperboy couldn't quite figure out when to put it in the bag when it rained, and it usually took a beating when he threw it on the driveway anyhow. The USA today always arrived the day after printing...having to come from Dallas.  No good.

Like Lauri I like the *feel* of the paper.  I have saved copies from important dates (to me) for years.  Starting with a copy of my birth announcment in the DOK (saved by my parents).  Weddings, funerals, tornadoes, job promotion announcments, football games, the Murrah building, and a few that just had special meaning to me or my family.  Powerful memories to go back and read them from time to time.  Hard to do with an online edition.  So I hope the printed edition never ends.  

I still love reading the buisness section..esp. tuesdays.  And I wouldn't miss the chance to read the "letters to the editor/ your views".   There's some weird puppies out there, but it gets my blood flowing in the mornings.  

Lauri....our cats love the paper too.  It makes a great toy for them to hide under/attack from after I'm done reading it.

----------

