Whether called … public editor, reader advocate, reader representative or ombudsman … more and more papers are listening to readers. Should yours?
By Sanders LaMont
American Society of Newspaper Editors © 1999
Some newspapers call them reader advocates. Others ombudsmen, reader representatives or public editors. The titles vary.
The concept, though, remains constant and the numbers are growing.
In Atlanta, Akron, Jackson, Los Angeles, Riverside, Miami, St. Louis and Mobile, daily newspapers have appointed journalists whose primary assignment is to listen to readers, make sure editors hear what was said, and use that information to help improve the newspaper. At least two more newspapers are considering the idea, following staff credibility projects that suggested a new reader representative would help the paper improve.
Is this recent growth spurt a millennial trend, or an attempt to ease editors’ concerns about credibility or just a positive bump in the budget cycle?
At The Atlanta Journal and The Atlanta Constitution it was simply a matter of the timing being right after a decade of wait, according to Editor Ron Martin.
“I finally got around to it after 10 years. There’s never been any doubt in my mind we needed better contact with readers,” Martin said.
Improving contacts with readers is a goal at most newspapers, but there’s more to it than that for Martin and several other editors who use reader advocates to help deal with reader concerns.
Reasons for having a reader representative – like duties and titles – vary all over the country. But keeping the doors open to readers’ concerns, and subjecting their papers to professional constant self-examination, are on almost every editor’s list.
In Atlanta the time was right in part because the right person was available – veteran news executive George Edmonson. He had experience, maturity and a good feel for the job, Martin said. Plus, Martin was able to find wiggle room within the newspaper’s structure, and budget, to create the job this year.
In Miami, Publisher Alberto Ibargüen decided to add the position to meet the diverse demands of readers in the challenging Miami market.
Miami required someone uniquely qualified to represent the points of view of readers, Ibargüen said, so he picked the editor of the Spanish-language newspaper El Nuevo Herald, Barbara Gutierrez, an experienced journalist who happened to be a Harvard-educated Afro-Cuban female. She is both a reader representative and an advocate for the newsrooms at both the Spanish-language paper and the English-language Miami Herald. Ibargüen is enthusiastic about the concept, and results.
Gutierrez says readers reacted “with glee” at the announcement. “Many have told me they never thought The Herald would ever have a reader representative.” The newsroom staff is adjusting to the idea.
In Salt Lake City the veteran reader advocate Shinika Sykes agrees with Gutierrez about reader response. “Readers like having someone they can call about concerns… and they get to speak to a live person,” Sykes said.
The Tribune’s editor, James E. Shelledy, says Sykes provides an outlet for readers, and, “Sykes makes me think about why we do things the way we do. That’s why every newspaper in America ought to have a reader advocate.”
Not every newspaper editor agrees, obviously, but the eight reader advocates appointed since the beginning of last year bring to at least 36 U.S. and two Canadian newspapers with a reader representative on staff. The number of U.S. newspapers with ombudsmen, by whatever title, was 28 just 15 years ago. There has been considerable churn, but the trend in the second half of this decade – directly coincident with the ASNE push for credibility initiatives by newspapers- has clearly been upward.
No one knows exactly how many newspapers have reader advocates, reader representatives, ombudsmen or public editors, according to Art Nauman, secretary of the Organization of News Ombudsmen and a retired ombudsman for the Sacramento Bee. The ombudsmen’s group has approximately 100 members, including associates from academia and journalists who support the idea. Those numbers include broadcasters and members from 11 other countries.
The Los Angeles Times recently became the biggest paper in the United States to appoint a reader representative (see story, page 9). The Bradenton (Fla.) Herald remains the smallest.
A history lesson
Ombudsmen began in Sweden as people who looked after the interests of justice in affairs between the government and citizens in the early 1800s. The definition has widened. It is now a person who investigates complaints, reports findings, and mediates fair settlements, especially between aggrieved parties.
The giant Japanese newspaper Asahi Shimbun had a staff of reader representatives as early as the 1920s. Its competitor, Yomiuri Shimbun, soon followed.
But the innovation had actually been borrowed from yet another newspaper: Pulitzer’s New York World, which had a committee to address such concerns a full decade earlier.
Still, the Japanese newspapers probably devote the most resources to the idea. Journalist Osami Okuya, senior member of the Ombudsman Committee of the Yomiuri, has a staff of 28 ombudsmen. His group sits down every day in formal session with senior editors and critiques the newspaper rigorously.
As far as U.S. newspapers that are still publishing are concerned, The Courier-Journal in Louisville, Ky., is generally credited with having the first news ombudsman. The idea caught on among several U.S. newspapers in the early 1980s, lost ground in the tight-budgeted early 1990s, but is now growing again.
Most reader representatives are based at large newspapers: the Chicago Tribune, The Washington Post, The Philadelphia Inquirer, The Boston Globe, The Arizona Republic in Phoenix, the Star-Tribune in Minneapolis and the Los Angeles Times among them.
But the Bradenton (Fla.) Herald, weekday circulation 41,626, has had reader representative Paul Bartley in place for a decade, dealing with everything from errors in stories to circulation service. (See the list on page 11 for U.S. papers with reader representatives.)
Most newspapers still don’t have them
Most American newspapers, including almost all of the 84 percent that are smaller than 50,000 daily circulation, do not have a reader representative. About half the biggest papers in the country do.
Many editors concede they are unwilling to part with the dollars that would provide one more copy editor, reporter, or a better travel budget. Others argue an ombudsman might reduce accountability by keeping readers away from the newsroom. Privately, some concede they are not eager to be second-guessed in public, or in front of the staff.
Many argue that editors should take all the calls and deal with readers’ complaints and accountability is best handled by the newsroom. Good editors, the argument goes, should find time to hear what readers say and react appropriately.
USA Today, with 1.6 million daily circulation, does not currently have an reader representative on the staff.
“That does not mean we are arrogant or think we are perfect,” president and publisher Tom Curley said. The paper is not opposed to the idea, he said, but has pursued more pressing priorities such as adding reporters across the country.
The subject has not been discussed recently, Curley said, though the idea of staying tuned in to readers is taken very seriously. That function falls partly to the editor in charge of letters to the editor, who pursues complaints internally. Curley also said if an ombudsman’s position came up for serious discussion, he expects there would be some internal conflict over the idea.
At The New York Times there’s no apparent conflict, and the newspaper’s feelings about the matter have not changed through the years, according to Bill Keller, the managing editor.
“We believe the top editors of the paper, and the department heads, need to be personally accountable for what we print – accountable to our readers, to the broader public and to those we write about. Accountable, too, to our staff, for the way in which we evaluate their work and, on occasion, defend it.
“Historically we have believed that an ombudsman or similar reader representative, formally designated, would represent a dilution of those relationships,” Keller said.
In Miami, Ibargüen doesn’t believe newspaper executives can deliver, despite good intentions.
“The reality is much of the time we say ‘thank you very much’ and just pass it off,” Ibargüen said. A reader representative takes the time to listen that editors and publishers don’t have, he said.
The credibility connection
Sandra Mims Rowe, editor of The Oregonian in Portland, does not believe editors can do it all, given the demands of their job. “Based on my experience, that’s simply not realistic,” she said. Rowe addressed the issue in a speech last year.
As ASNE president Rowe pushed editors to tackle credibility as a survival issue. She has practiced what she preached about reader representation even when it hurt.
“I know it can be painful,” she said. “At both The Virginian-Pilot (in Norfolk) and The Oregonian I’ve cringed when the ombudsman has pointed out an egregious error in judgment or fact by our newsroom staff,” Rowe said, “… but I’ve never doubted that having an ombudsman was in the long-term interest of the newspaper.”
The Oregonian’s public editor, Michele McLellan, doesn’t want to make the boss cringe. She wants to make the paper better by taking a position outside the newsroom where she can “give an honest voice to public complaints.”
“At the same time,” she said, “the public editor needs to have a voice in newsroom discussions, although probably not be involved in making specific decisions. It’s a delicate balance and one that can succeed only if top management gives the position a lot of independence and a lot of support – even if top editors don’t happen to agree with every decision the public editor makes.”
At the Hartford (Conn.) Courant Elissa Papirno, the associate editor/reader representative admits it’s not fun dealing with defensive people on the staff, but one of her rewards is working with staff members who see the benefits and cooperate to solve problems. When that happens, “Then the institution is perceived as open to the public and not afraid of criticism,” Papirno said.
Karin Winner, editor of The San Diego Union-Tribune, doesn’t agree with every opinion expressed by her newspaper’s readers’ representative, Gina Lubrano, but she supports her and the idea.
“The newsroom respects her a great deal, because she is a person with so much integrity. … Gina’s Monday column … can sometimes be brutally frank in her opposition to what we’ve done in the pages of the paper. But she is always clear about the fact that she’s speaking for herself and her readers and not for the publisher. She is also very conscientious about giving me a heads-up when she is going to land on the other side of an issue. And goes to great lengths to give anyone who was involved in the decision the opportunity to respond.”
Variety among newspapers
No two newspapers use reader representatives the same way.
George Langford, public editor at the Chicago Tribune, plays a major role in the effort to reduce errors at the paper, deals with correction requests and sits on the editorial board. He feels his paper’s approach “has affected the way we edit the paper, from photo and graphics selection to how we weigh the news.” Langford mediates disputes, enforces policy, and is involved in the newsroom.
In Atlanta, Edmonson, the reader representative, serves as a primary contact for readers to reach the paper, and “as a way to help educate the staff about what we hear,” according to editor Martin.
Edmonson also studies the daily paper and provides a detailed note on the quality of that issue. He sees his role as providing a central place for readers to call, whatever their needs, and a way to make sure the staff hears. In addition, “We have a better handle on corrections.”
At the Star-Tribune in Minneapolis, reader representative Lou Gelfand, perhaps the longest-tenured reader representative in the nation, stays detached but watchful. He likes “to be able to bring about constructive change in policy and style.” He sees a practical benefit. “Credibility is enhanced because corrections are published.”
The reader advocate at The Arizona Republic in Phoenix was appointed by Pam Johnson, the executive editor, because she felt it was important for the credibility of the newspaper at a time of great change in the community. Richard de Uriarte sees himself as a link for the community with the newsroom, not an in-house critic.
“I think we at the Republic think much more about the readers’ sensitivities and our own credibility than we did a few years ago,” he said. He believes his job helps foster that.
In West Palm Beach, Fla., The Palm Beach Post’s C.B. Hanif said “readers know we are willing to be accountable.”
“I am no authority, and don’t set policy, but I am a good listener and fairly easy to reach,” Hanif said.
San Diego’s reader representative, Lubrano, sees herself in the middle. “I may represent the reader, but I am independent in my assessments. It’s not my job to side with the reader, or to side with the newspaper.”
What do readers say?
Readers like the idea of a reader representative, according to the journalists directly involved, despite natural skepticism about who pays their salary. Every ombudsman hears complaints that readers simply can’t reach another human being on the telephone, or don’t know who to call, or the Web site doesn’t list the editors’ names clearly.
Some readers are intimidated by the idea of calling the editor of the newspaper, a sometimes mythical figure if you don’t happen to know one personally.
Most ombudsmen have been accused of being apologists for the company, but all ombudsman also hear people say “I’m glad you are there.”
That positive feedback helps, because the next caller may be a crazed individual who sees genitalia depicted in every locator map, or a colleague in the newsroom whose feelings are hurt.
Reader advocates report that some readers will rant about the newspaper’s perceived biases, an editorial position on gun control, or ghastly mistakes in spelling or grammar, but complete the call with a polite “thank you” because someone took the time to listen.
Many complaints seem minor, dealing with infractions of grammar or spelling which slipped through the net. But readers say those items reflect a lack of care, an inattention to detail which brings into question the facts elsewhere in the paper. Those errors show up as one of the reasons some newspaper readers find newspapers less credible than they used to be, according to ASNE’s Journalism Credibility Project.
Many complaints are not easy to resolve, and require research, persistence, skill and time to deal with.
Readers sometimes credit ombudsmen with quality improvements, whether credit is deserved or not. It is difficult to determine why a certain new columnist was added (or a bad one dropped), a tendency toward sensationalism was curbed, or a wayward reporter held accountable now that readers have a channel to express their views.
When pressed for examples of changes for the better at their newspaper because they were there, most reader representatives were either cautious or polite. Most are quick to acknowledge, as did Papirno in Hartford, that the decisions are made in the newsroom. Readers may nudge editors to change, with an assist from a reader advocate, but it is the folks in the newsroom who take action and deserve the credit.
Has it worked?
How has it worked out in Atlanta, where the experiment is still new?
“We are very happy we did it,” Martin said. “It’s been very valuable for the readers and a great resource for (the staff) too.”
Back in Miami, Ibargüen had no doubts about his new reader representative’s impact. He says Gutierrez reaches into the communities and makes sure readers’ voices are heard in his newspapers.
She has respect and impact because “She is so honest,” he said. “People find it hard to be angry with her,” even when they wish she would “put a little sugar coating on it.”
Across the country in San Diego, where the idea was adopted more than two decades ago, Winner, the executive editor, remains enthusiastic.
“It enhances our credibility with our readers to have someone whose sole reason for being is to represent them. It helps to mitigate the perception that we journalists will do what we darn well please and the readers be damned.”
Winner is an advocate. “I wholeheartedly believe in this role. I know how important it is for us in the newsroom to have someone asking key questions about motivation, approach, sources, holes in stories, missed facts.”
Even if on some days you wish it had a little sugar coating.
LaMont is ombudsman of The Sacramento (Calif.) Bee.
