Pine trees fringe the shoreline. The lake ripples. A few clouds drift lazily by in a brilliant blue sky. How many times have Minnesotans retreated to such a lakeshore to calm jangled nerves and let thoughts coalesce?
The artist has angled the canvas edge, creating the optical trick of seeing the lake as if through an open northwoods cabin window. The clever painting seems both perfect for this windowless conference room at the Star Tribune and utterly at odds with what is about to happen here.
In a few moments the editorial page staff will gather before this vision of Minnesota perfection to examine the worst problems facing the city, the metro area, the state, the country and the world. They will search for hope to offer, rap the knuckles of the powerful and send political activists and bloggers into a frenzy of response. It’s here that the editorial writers and editors bring their tentative thoughts, vetting them before colleagues until consensus emerges on what the newspaper’s official opinion will be in the unsigned editorials on the opinion page.
If there is an inner sanctum at the Star Tribune, this is it. It’s been more than a quarter of a century since I observed one of these meetings, which may say something about just how separate this enclave is from the newsroom where I work.
Still, as the reader’s representative I get lots of questions about the editorials, on how the letters to the editor are chosen and why certain syndicated columnists are published and others aren’t. So I decided to breach the wall separating the newsroom from the editorial department and let readers glimpse a part of the newspaper seldom in public view. Today I’ll examine how editorials and editorial cartoons are created. Next Sunday, I’ll explain how letters and commentary end up on the pages.
In the long-ago meeting where I first observed this process, I was the only woman in a room of older gentlemen, all dressed in white business shirts and dark ties. Now it’s as if I’ve reached that moment in the “The Wizard of Oz” when the screen suddenly shifts from black and white to color. Susan Albright, the editorial page editor, slips into a seat at the conference table. Her blue eyes crinkle into an easy smile wreathed by the glint of blond hair. I imagine a classic power broker sizing up this friendly face and figuring Albright for a pushover. That would be a serious miscalculation.
She lets the conversation meander as writers pitch ideas and layer on nuances of opinion. There is debate but no real argument among these generally like-minded people. They’ll be writing without a byline, in sync with long-standing editorial page values of the Star Tribune. That official voice has prompted more than a few conservative commentators to dub it “the most liberal editorial page in the country.”
Every now and then Albright redirects the conversation or raises a question that slices to the core of an issue. Deputy editorial page editor Jim Boyd occasionally glances up from scheduling editorials to lob something mischievous into the conversation. The writers ricochet from one topic to another: gay marriage, food-shelf use, Northwest Airlines, child care, early childhood education and flag-burning.
It looks very casual. But after an hour the week’s schedule is nearly full and the writers head off with a clearer sense of what they’re going to say on behalf of the newspaper. Whoever happens to sit at the head of the table runs the meeting, but there’s no question who is in control: Albright’s methods may be subtle, but she gets what she wants from her staff.
Guiding values
Albright has presided over the editorial pages since she arrived in Minneapolis in 1993, after doing the same job at the Arizona Daily Star for seven years. She grew up on a farm in Republic, Ohio, and finds the agricultural underpinnings of Minnesota a comfortable fit.
She brings a sense of stewardship to this job. The topics and problems change, but the page’s core values that date to the Cowles family’s purchase of the paper in 1935 are something she guards. “We won’t change course quickly,” Albright said.
Regionalism is one value that guides these editorial writers. It’s behind some positions that don’t line up neatly as progressive or liberal. They’ve been pro-stadium, taken pro-business stands on taxes and worker’s compensation. They favored NAFTA.
The liberal reputation stems from a value of supporting liberal social causes. “We have concern for people whose voices aren’t heard,” Albright said. Her boss, publisher Keith Moyer, said, “Newspapers, on social programs, should be looking out for the little guy.” The paper’s editorials support civil and women’s rights, abortion rights, family planning and gay rights. “We’re on the right side of the angels on gay marriage,” Moyer added.
A value of internationalism factors in: “This country needs to be involved with the world,” Albright said. The final value is that government can be a positive force in the lives of citizens.
When Cowles Media sold the Star Tribune to the California-based McClatchy Co. in 1998, Albright said, McClatchy CEO Gary Pruitt was quick to reassure that the company would leave the editorial positions up to the local paper. The opinions in the unsigned editorials haven’t shifted since then, although some commentary has moved slightly to the right at the behest of Moyer. Editor Anders Gyllenhaal heads the newsroom and does not have a role in shaping the paper’s editorial positions — another way the paper sequesters opinion from news.
Moyer recalled that when he arrived, he thought the opinions on the rest of the page too often echoed the paper’s editorial positions. “I’ve encouraged and pushed them to get more conservatives, more voices in general, in that page.”
Opinion Exchange editor Eric Ringham puts at least one conservative column on the page each day. That very day, Moyer noted, readers would find columns by both liberal firebrand Molly Ivins and the New York Times’ John Tierney — “a more conservative guy” — on the page. “It’s greatly improved,” Moyer said.
He shows no inclination to push the editorial page hard to the right, which is what liberal readers have suggested in regular e-mails to me ever since conservative commentary became a daily feature. Moyer said he isn’t looking to shake up the staff by adding a conservative the next time there is an opening. It would be up to Boyd and Albright to make that hire, he said. Both seem very satisfied with the current mix, a staff Boyd described as mostly liberal, but ranging toward libertarian and conservative on some economic issues.
Moyer meets regularly with Albright and Boyd. “It’s perfectly within a publisher’s purview to be as involved as he wants to be on an editorial page. I want to see the editorials [before they run]. I wouldn’t demand to see a news story,” Moyer said.
The few times he’s raised objections about editorials, Moyer said, it’s been about the tone rather than the position. “There have been some specific editorials where he thought they had a knee-jerk liberal tone,” Albright said. Although he describes himself as a little more conservative than the staff, Moyer also said, “I don’t think it’s the publisher’s place to come in and change 100 years of tradition. I respect the process.” When I asked him to plot himself on a continuum from liberal to conservative, he placed a dot just to the right of the middle for himself and just to the left of middle for the editorial positions. In election season, he becomes more directly involved, sitting in on some endorsement interviews and discussions.
Albright said she and the publisher have a bit more weight in the conversation because “we have to be able to live with that position, put our names on the page.”
She doesn’t ask editorial writers to write editorials with which they don’t agree. Boyd said the preference is to assign the staffer who has developed deep expertise. While all are generalists, each has certain specialties. For Albright, the expertise is in arts and culture, national politics and policies. For Boyd, it’s international and national issues. Ron Meador focuses on science and the environment; Steve Berg on Minneapolis and metro issues; Denise Johnson on education and St. Paul; Kate Stanley on health and legal affairs; Dave Hage on business and economics; and Lori Sturdevant on Minnesota politics, policy and elections.
Also on the staff are several editors who occasionally write as well: Tim O’Brien edits letters to the editor and writes the Blog House column. Ringham edits the Opinion Exchange page and sometimes writes on issues including the arts, Egypt and Asia, where he has traveled widely. David Banks designs the pages. Susan Wolkerstorfer is the deputy commentary editor and edits copy. Copy editor Lisa Hoff also edits letters and compiles the Netlets feature online.
The goal, Albright said, is “not just to comment, but to try to make a difference — to lead.”
For readers, “If you want a resource of people who study the issues and comment on them, it’s valuable,” Moyer said. “If you want someone who always agrees with you, maybe not. There’s a lot of work behind those editorials, hard work.”
Opinion as art
In a nearby cubicle sits Steve Sack, a quiet, bespectacled fellow who spends hours pondering what to draw for the next day’s paper. His demeanor belies his cartoons, which often land on the page with the impact of an incendiary device.
“I look at the editorial cartoon as a work of art, a personal expression of opinion in a visual form,” explained the editorial cartoonist. He’s been drawing them for 25 years, estimating he has created over 5,800 cartoons. In 2004 he was a finalist for a Pulitzer Prize. It still doesn’t come easy.
It starts the night before, when Sack watches at least an hour and a half of news shows. In the morning, he reads newspapers and searches websites and blogs of varying political persuasions. He makes a list of half a dozen possible topics, usually a mix of big news and smaller human interest stories that get people talking.
President Bush is clearly a favorite target, but then so was President Bill Clinton. “I drew many more cartoons of Democratic Gov. Rudy Perpich than of Republican Gov. Tim Pawlenty. I simply found Perpich to be more cartoony. And of course we’ll never have another cartoonist’s godsend like Jesse Ventura.”
I ask at 11 a.m. what he’s thinking about drawing for the next day. He replies, “It’s way too early.” At about 3 p.m., he puts a blank page on his drawing table and surrenders to the best idea he’s got. Producing the image usually takes two to four hours. This day the resulting cartoon shows two Hezbollah fighters launching an enormous missile at civilian targets.
Sack doubts political cartoons really sway opinion. “I don’t expect a diehard supporter of George Bush to change his mind based on my cartoons. It would probably have the opposite effect.
“Editors here understand a cartoon is like an opinion column. … This is one person’s way of looking at the world. If you’re not interested in that from me, it doesn’t bother me at all,” he said.
If the aim of these editorials and cartoons is to provoke reaction, they do. Responses roar back daily in a raucous, encouraging, insulting and illuminating stew of reader opinion.
