Last month, news broke that the Star Tribune opinion section would cut back Sunday columnists Katherine Kersten and Nick Coleman from weekly to twice monthly. Coleman, as predicted, gave up the gig.
This past Sunday, editorial page editor Scott Gillespie filled out his dance card: conservative Jason Lewis, also twice monthly; additional columns from conservative commentary editor Doug Tice; and a Saturday column from editorial writer John Rash, whose politics (to my eyes, anyway) aren’t worn on the sleeve. Guess we’ll see.
Gillespie, no doubt aware that he was adding two conservatives while losing Coleman, made sure to mention that Lori Sturdevant (who provides succor to liberals) was keeping her Sunday column.
Still, if you add up the regulars, the Strib’s local op-ed columnist line-up just got more conservative.
How you feel about this (assuming you feel anything at all) likely depends on your ideology. Lefties can’t help seeing it as further right-wing tilt from the paper that endorsed Norm Coleman and Tom Horner. Conservatives — especially who embrace the “Red Star” rhetoric — will see it as a necessary, if inadequate, counterweight from the liberal media establishment.
Me, I see a hole: the sharp-elbowed lefty. Sturdevant is the model of institutional civility; Tice, similarly, works with a scalpel, not a switchblade. Meanwhile, Kersten is a full-throated culture warrior, while Lewis embraces the right-wing’s economic battle cry. Their counterweight? No one, regularly.
The Strib’s editorial section doesn’t need a senseless ranter, but it needs more passion and regular representation from that part of the progressive community that makes Strib editorialists nervous. A few of the reporter/analysts I regularly read: Karl Bremer on the right-wing political-religious money machine; Rob Levine on education; Mark Gisleson on media and culture; Ed Kohler on technology; Sally Jo Sorensen on non-metro politics.
I realize this is the dreaded “blogosphere,” but frankly, with Kersten and Lewis in the mix, that spirit is already on the page. I don’t know if any of these folks would want the gig, but as part of the bargain they’d have to be willing to take an edit. Ideally, a prominent platform and professional vetting would serve writers and readers well.
I don’t know if the examples I’ve mentioned would wear well. But they’re representative of a part of the conversation that, save for Coleman, doesn’t really happen on the Strib edit page.
Gillespie says, “I always ask readers to try to look at our pages over the course of any one week. If they do that, they’ll find a really broad variety of perspectives.”
Somewhat to my dismay, he suggests that national columns can fill local gaps: “The mix of syndicated columnists we use is really important, and the readers I hear from value a ‘sharp-elbowed’ syndicated piece as much or more than those pieces we publish from local writers either as commentary or columns.”
I don’t agree: syndicated columns have their place, but local perspectives in a local paper are more important. (The rest of the Strib seems to be embracing this.)
“I think we’ll do fine meeting readers’ sharp-elbow expectations for liberals and conservatives after these changes,” Gillespie says, “ but we’ll keep listening and react if necessary.”
Clearly they should just hire me. I would write a twice monthly column from the left, throwing elbows when necessary. And they wouldn’t even have to pay me much. I’m even civil enough that you guys have published a couple of my pieces in community voices. Seriously, I’m the Strib’s answer.
On a more serious note, it’s remarkable how well the right has done in painting nearly every news outlet that isn’t expressly partisan right as hopelessly liberal and biased. Papers like the Strib are willing to throw a lot of sops to the right in order to be taken seriously by them. It won’t work.
A relative newbie to the community, I’m not as familiar with the names and viewpoints as you are David, but I’ve subscribed to the dead-tree edition of the ‘Strib since I had a place of my own to have it delivered, and the rightward tilt of the ‘Strib’s editorial page has been a disappointment from the get-go, especially given Minnesota’s reputation (considerably exaggerated, in my view) as a “liberal” state by folks in other parts of the country.
I do read some national columnists regularly – not being a fire-eater, Froma Harrop is one that I read twice a week – but my inclination is to agree that local newspapers need local columnists, and with the current lineup, I barely glance at the op-ed page. I’d love to see someone left of center with, as you say, “sharp elbows,” to take on the more conventional voices on the right.
My model for this is Mike Littwin at the Denver Post, who has been a “news” columnist for years, and was recently moved to the op-ed page of the Post, but I’d be happy to see just about anyone with articulate lefty views and, as you say, “sharp elbows.” Among the less-desirable characteristics of far too many columnists, left and right, is the tendency toward pomposity. I’d like to see and read someone not afraid to take a needle to those balloons of self-importance.
Despite what Swift and other conservative readers/contributors of/to MinnPost contend, I’ve seen the strib leaning ever further right over the past five years. Where softball non-reporting on our dear governor and editorial-board drafted opinions lead, the rest of the opinion (and “reporting”) pieces will soon follow.
No surprise here. But another good reason to refuse to buy the rag.
I can’t bear to listen to right-wing radio, but have occasionally seen Jason Lewis on Tom Hauser’s Sunday morning show.
To me, he seems to speak in right-wing cliches and, when called out by his more liberal Face-Off opponent, responds by repeating the same (or similar) one a couple of times. Perhaps even conservative readers would get tired of waiting for him to apply his own mind to problems instead of repeating mantras.
I am tired of reading opinions from the left and right. They are sooooo predictable. As a life long independent, I see the bias in the news media not in terms of left or right. I see the bias as favoring a two party system over political choice. We have choice in our state but those other voices are not represented in our local media.
How about adding independent commentary? I’m not applying for the job. But it would be joyful to read such a column that on any given topic I am not completely certain I know what will be said. As an at home mom, deep into the needs of children, I would find an independent commentator’s opinions as delightful food for thought.
Mr. Gillespie are you listening?
Obviously, the new owners at the Strib have been careening to the right. Perhaps some of their reluctance to fully engage non-traditional or progressive views was motivated by the barage of vitriol they would receive when doing such from our former Governor. Clearly they were worried about loss of access to Pawlenty’s administration. All of the “round-table” discussions manufactured by the Strib turn out to be nothing more than acknowledgements of the status quo for their corporate benefactors and and advertisers. A year ago they conducted a round table on the future of food production and the participants were the CEO’s of Cargill, General Mills and Lund Foods. It was presented as a deep look at necessary changes in the way food is produced and brought to market while in reality it was a road map to environmental destruction, deteriorating food quality, dangerous projections of genetic engineering into our environment and the further promoting of industrial farming into ecologically sensitive and previously self sufficient undeveloped countries. It was a shameless display of the obscene profit picture those three food giants expect the world to embrace. I was shocked the Strib even conceived of such a conference dominated entirely by environmentally destructive producers. That was eye opening for me. Further more I have heard and read Sturdevant since she came to the Strib and her elbows are anything but sharp. To me she doesn’t have the historical knowledge of a writer such as Coleman and lacks perspective on what is important durring interviews. She reminds me of Fox’s Juan Williams, just a token to the left to make the Strib’s realignment a little easier to take. Without Coleman there are no writers able to direct a laser focus on progressive issues. The two writers replacing Coleman and Kirsten offer up an apolitical and puzzling take on almost anything. I never read them. There are a few good reporters still nested at the Strib but I expect they will be joining Minnpost soon
I know the Strib counts me as a reader, but guess what? Most of it goes directly into recycling. I buy the Sunday edition to feed my comics addiction, get the coupons and the ads, read the South-of-the-River section, book reviews and calendar, Lori and that’s about it anymore.
There’s rarely any “news” in the newspaper any more. Only once is a great while is there any in-depth research into an article. It’s pretty much the same stuff you hear on the radio in the car or on the TV if you watch the news.
Unless there’s an earthquake, flood, tsunami or volcano blowing it’s top, there’s rarely anything that truly counts as international news. As for national news, most of it consists of weather-related events. Far too much of the national news comes from other news services and even that gets edited down to just the basics.
It takes two reporters to cover a local story any more. (How that makes financial sense, I really don’t know.) And when they do cover it pretty much “just the facts, ma’am”.
I’m not an online news consumer, other than MinnPost. After sitting in front of a computer all day at work, the last thing I want to do is to go home, turn on my computer, and have to search for authentic, well-researched and sourced news.
It seems to be the Strib is just writing it’s own suicide note by assuming that “everyone” is getting their news online or that everyone in Minnesota has turned right. Subscribing to the New York Times might just be my solution.
David, what kind of editing do you think they do to the columnists at the STrib? Because they don’t seem to bother doing even basic fact-checking with Katherine Kersten. Unless there’s a double standard for progressive editorials?
Sally Jo would be a great choice because her good writing is backed with strong reporting and researching, and she is consistently and rigorously fair. If the STrib is serious about being the “Minnesota” newspaper, they’d do a great service is bringing on someone who watchdogs southern MN so well.
After years of the Scout, Lori, and Coleman every week it appears that the pendulum has swung with the voters as we now have Lewis/Kersten, Lori, and Tice. It is interesting to hear how people just skip past those with a differing opinion and only read the people they agree with. No wonder we seem to be a polarized society.
For what it’s worth I hold much the same viewpoint as Shiela (above)…get the Sunday edition, read the comics and recycle the rest. Actually, I think there might be a fair number like us.
The formula for newspaper success has always been 1) good investigatve reporting, 2) follow-up’s and then 3) analysis. Too bad they can’t figure out that revenues usually follow.
Oh well…good luck, Strib! It was good for a while…
Anyone else think that Sunday’s Op-Ed section was kind of hilarious? Doug writes a thoughtful piece about how Pawlenty’s book isn’t too deep — do yah think? — and then EXCERPTS 1000 WORDS of it, just so we can be sure. Sop it was sort of Tim Pawlenty Day. Thanks Tim!! You left us with only 6 bill in debt! Then you have that al knowing Jason Lewis up there in his new perch, because presumably not enough people hear from him already at K Whatever and KK will be back next week, for those of you who miss lengthy pieces on a book suggesting that liberals all favor wanton self gratification and societal decay and really all ought to be shot. Aargh.
Not happy with the right-ward bent. If I wanted to read the Wall Street Journal, I’d buy that paper — don’t need to see their constant editorials reprinted in the Strib.
As the City Pages’ expose of Bachmann pointed out before the 2008 election, her excesses are rarely reported in full above any fold in the region’s largest paper. Did the Strib’s summary of the TPaw years mention that, besides having time to visit more states than MN counties in the past couple of years, he had time to WRITE A BOOK? (Maybe it did, I dunno.)
Lewis already has a radio show — is the conservative gene pool that shallow that he is all they could get?
There is still good work done at the Strib. The railroad accident pieces and the water quality series were especially well done, though BNSF and some farmers took issue.
The bigger hole is in considering the whole scene — the St. Paul rag, the City Pages sleaze-wrapper and now further hole-digging at the Star Tribune — not a regular local voice of the left in print remains. What also is diminished with Coleman’s exit is the familiar, likeable voice of shared memory, someone you know and trust over the years even if if you don’t always agree. Here’s hoping that Lori S. can morph a little more in that direction. At least someone there can still tell their Elmer Andersens apart.
BTW Coleman has a left elbow that jabbed a lot of Dems and libs over the years.
This would be meaningful if anyone actually read the dang thing.
I’m in the same camp as Laura (#5). Constantly bleating the same old catch phrases and lobbing the same old rotten tomatoes at the other side eventually leads a lot of us to tune much of it out.
There was a time when I read both the Pioneer Press and Strib. One of the first things I would do was open up the opinion pages. I never read the PP anymore. I get the Wed-Sun editions of the Strib and rarely open the opinion page – it’s all so predictable, and the rightward tilt is just not worth the aggrivation.
As soon as I post this I’m calling the Strib to cancel Wed-Sat. I’ll keep getting the Sunday edition because I still like to page through the ads and sometimes they have a $5 Cub coupon I can use.
As a conservative, I find myself reading mostly left leaning press. I don’t need to read to know what I think, I prefer to understand would people on the other side of center think. In other words, I’d rather hear the preaching from the last row than from the choir loft.
As a commenter on MinnPost, I see very few fellow conservatives. The regular conservative commenters can be tallied on one hand. Why is that? Would MinnPost draw more conservative readers if they had a conservative columnist? Does MinnPost care; are they satisfied preaching to the choir?
This just in: Observers say Sun appears to rise in East… more from MinnPost on this phenomenon in, oh, about three years.
While I appreciate the call-out David I think you miss the purpose of the Strib and its opinion pages: They are there to push the views of the plutocrats who now own the joint.
They don’t want to hear a variety of voices or even honest discourse, as I have written many times on our blog over at the cucking stool. Indeed, the pages have gotten rid of those useless (to them) discourse tools of reason and evidence in favor of authoritarian repetition and assertion.
“They are there to push the views of the plutocrats who now own the joint.”
#19 Isn’t this exactly what you do over at the Stool?
It is good to see that many of the readers are familiar with and can almost quote some of the writers that they detest. It means that they are reading the columns. I think that is why they are printed.
All of the commenting by liberals bemoaning the rightward tilt of the Strib glosses over the one sure fact-the Strib needs to sell papers and ads to stay in business.
The op/ed section is (supposed to be) the one section where the editors can manage the content to increase readership, whether online or in print. It is also the one section where the editors need to respond to what their readers want. If that means a right ward tilt (though my opinion would be that it will be less obviously left) then so be it.
The Strib is after all a business with the goal of making money. Given the ratings dominance of the conservative Fox News over all the rest of liberal cable news outlets combined, how is a conservative shift in the op/ed section not a smart business move?
Tom writes:
“It is good to see that many of the readers are familiar with and can almost quote some of the writers that they detest. It means that they are reading the columns. I think that is why they are printed.”
We respond because *other people* read them, not because we think they are important because they are well written and reasoned opinions.
The fact that we *do* still write about the Strib means that it hasn’t yet sunk to meaninglessness like local TV news, which nobody even bothers to criticize anymore.
But sooner or later no one will take the paper seriously or even care what is said on the opinion pages. As it is the Strib is only one or two steps away from its craptacular broadcast brethren.
Check out Friday’s Strib piece on Pawlenty’s new persona by Kevin Diaz. WOW! If that is journalism then I’m insane. No better evidence of the lurch to the right than the evolution of Kevin Diaz into a Pawlenty campaign worker on the Strib’s staff.
I think the Diaz article correctly identified the spontaneous organic supernatural phenomenon in which children all over the country spontaneously wish to push their stuffed animals into the hands of Tim Pawlenty. They appreciate his firm line on taxes and dedication to transferirng the tax burden to municipalities and know that their stuffed animals belong his healing hands.
I don’t think the problem I have is not wanting to read opposing points of view. It’s just that so much of what gets printed is predictable political claptrap. If you tell me the topic of a Kersten or Krauthammer article, I could write the article. There are some exceptions. I like David Brooks.
The problem is the institutional proselytizing for conservative ideas I see coming from the media. Despite the canards about the ‘liberal media’ I see very little space devoted to liberal economic ideas. You may get some columns about progressive social ideas such as gay rights, but you never see columns advocating for the rights of workers vs. the rights of the moneyed class.
I simply don’t want to spend my money supporting media corporations that use their soap box to advocate for things I don’t believe in. I can get all the variety of opinion I need on the internet and at the library. At least for now, until corporate interests start censoring the internet and tax revenue for supporting libraries runs out.