News

Sports

Business

Multimedia

Life

Opinion

Obituaries

Community

Classifieds

Jobs

Motors

Real Estate

Local News

Press Talk: Of frumpy and a first-time user

Saturday, June 13 | 12:03 a.m.

BY LOU BRANCACCIO,
COLUMBIAN EDITOR

Lou Brancaccio

That "frumpy" lady. That Internet sensation lady from "Britain's Got Talent." That voice-of-an-angel lady.

She's slowly fading from the news.

But before she vanishes completely, are there lessons to be learned?

*****

Susan Boyle is her name. And singing sweet is her game. But there are plenty of singers that got game. So why did she make it so big?

Truth is, it was all about the frump. If you've seen her, you know what I mean. First, there is a bit of code involved in the use of the word "frumpy." That's the way the national media has often described her. But Noah Webster does not hesitate with what's at play:

"A dowdy, unattractive woman."

Beauty is indeed in the eye of the beholder, but even Boyle says there haven't been all that many men who have held her. None, to be exact. Certainly some might say otherwise, but to most of society she was not very easy on the eyes.

Why is this so important? Well it shouldn't be, but it is what vaulted Susan to stardom. Society immediately placed low expectations on anything she might do … because of the way she looked.

How sad.

So when she sang beautifully she so exceeded society's expectations, she became famous. Or infamous.

When a pretty lady sings like an angel … well, they're everywhere. But a frumpy lady, now that's news:

Man bites dog.

Clearly it is wrong for society to judge people by their looks. Many dolts like me are — in part — on the print side and not the TV side of the business because our looks aren't good enough. Yes, I'm a male frump. But all media tend to give coverage to what society believes are the beautiful people.

Well, let's hope the media give Boyle a little breathing room as she recovers from her moment in the spotlight.

*****

Hey, let's talk about the Web.

Again.

Yes, I often come back to discuss the Web, for a couple of reasons:

It's the emerging medium.
Because it's new, with new rules, newspapers are feeling their way through it all.

Recently someone who decided to comment on a story on our Web site for the first time got a quick lesson on Web "rules."

"The public commentary piece poses an interesting challenge for The Columbian," M.W. wrote. "Whatever substance is presented rationally and respectfully gets lost, it seems.

"People do like to voice their opinions and this would be a huge draw in attracting Internet readers.

"However, some of the posts amount to vicious personal attacks. I think I will pass on any more forum fights. It left me exhausted over the depth and range of emotion that was hurled about."

M.W. went on to say he didn't think those who posted comments were "well representative of Clark County's entire population."

"Perhaps this reflects our current 'reality show' culture of humiliating and denigrating others for sport.

"Call me old-fashioned, but I will resume my morning ritual of picking up The Columbian from my porch and enjoying it with my coffee before work."

Thanks, M.W. Obviously we love our print readers. They, along with our generous advertisers, pay most of the bills. Our Web users mostly are getting a free ride.

And I think most who read the comments on our stories realize it's not reflective of all community viewpoints. But they are reflective of some of them. So I appreciate the comments.

My hope is that folks like you won't give up on getting involved, because that's the real way to even things out. If only one segment is commenting, that could give readers the wrong impression. So join in!

Lou Brancaccio is The Columbian's editor. Reach him at lou.brancaccio@columbian.com.

by Matthew M : 6/13/09 8:45am - Report Abuse

Oh, Lou. It's so easy to get a single comment that reflects your opinion - that comments by most here are evil, personal, illogical, and reflect only a small minority of the county that clearly are off their medications (perhaps psychologically frumpy might term it well). So again, rather than 'Press Talk' about how you might acknowledge some reader comments, you dismiss them. Far worse, you actively ignore them by boxing them into a corner with all the other problem children.

Yeah, I'm now one of those 'Web users mostly getting a free ride' after stopping my subscription. But I'm happier for it.

by Omahkohkiaayo I'poyi : 6/13/09 9:56am - Report Abuse

Ditto on Matthew M's comments. How do we win Lou? You ask us to write in and we do with our comments and observations and invite rebuttal from you if you think we are off base. Instead of a dialogue, or fair criticism from you when you think our comments are unwarranted, then we get instead, your fawning all over those who do the same to you, and silence and no response for those those deemed to be negative and/or cryptic references to meanspiritedness and even being parasitic if not subscribers against those with critical comments and/or that are perceived to be negative comments. When someone points out that your response (by those invited by you to respond) stats are headed south, you respond with stats on hits (hange the metrics) or offer some lame excuse about everyone gone on Labor Day weekend. When you are asked a direct question, that all of us have to answer each day ("What is there about you--The Columbian--that is unique and not offered by a competitor that would justify hiring you?) we get no answer. When someone takes clearly a lot more time, care and research to respond to one of your columns than you clearly took to write it, again no response.

So OK, what can we say? This is your venue and you can turn off or ignore any comments as you wish. By the way, I heard that Howard Buck has been asking what the Clark College Independent has been working on. Does that mean that perhaps The Columbian is getting around to some inspiration from a student newspaper that has produced more substance on some important issues at Clark College than the infomerical puff-pieces produced by The Columbian? One of the trustees who was central in stopping the tenure of Christina Kopinski (caught on some emails in a recent public records request) works for The Columbian. Is that why no more coverage on the issue?

Thanks for listening. And yes, I buy both The Columbian and The Oregonian every day (I have a thing about my morning coffee and newspapers in print--I love the smell of ink) and yes I do urge all of your supporters not to stay silent but to write in and give you the kudos they think you deserve. Let a hundred flowers bloom, let all ideas contend.

There are all kinds of "free rides" including newspapers and editors that think they are somehow "entitled" to markets, market shares, to escape from their debts through bankruptcy (while staying in business) jobs and to investigate and critique others but are somehow immune from the same by some of those others.

by Lou Brancaccio : 6/13/09 1:20pm - Report Abuse

You might have missed this part of my column...

Of course the comments aren't reflective of all of the community. I don't think you'd disagree with that. And I went on to say (you might have missed it) "But they are reflective of some of them. So I appreciate the comments."

by Matthew M : 6/13/09 9:29pm - Report Abuse

No, I don't think we missed it, at all...

It might be a cost-savings measure for the Columbian to have your column responses outsourced to some Indian call center. I think 90-95% of those who visit the website can anticipate exactly as Omah puts it concerning your responses, no answer.

by Will Bridge : 6/14/09 2:00am - Report Abuse

"My hope is that folks like you won't give up on getting involved, because that's the real way to even things out. If only one segment is commenting, that could give readers the wrong impression. So join in!"

Lou, that sure sounds to me like you're desperately fishing for favorable comments. Oh, & by the way, your website obviously has advertising sprinkled in. A free ride for web readers? I think not. I'm sure there would be more ads, if only you could persuade the readership that your publication is relevant.

by Ham Chuck : 6/14/09 2:01am - Report Abuse

Not that I'm jumping on the defense for Columbian here... But lets be reasonable. I have harped on this site for comprehensive data and analysis whenever Columbian put up numbers. But I understand some of them are beyond local levels - and yes I still wish to see analysis as good journalism dictate.

But you have to realize that, forum commenting, while it may be new to you (both Columbian and commentors here), it has been around since the 70's via newsgroups. It is a place for people to grief, rant (helena and company), disparage, and once in a while a well written response.

Most of the crap we write here are opinions. Heck, most of my posts are picking fights with knee jerk reactionaries after I've just gotten home from going out. If Columbian didn't provide a forum for us, where will we go? KATU? KOIN? KGW? Most of them (except KATU) has shut down commenting because of the nasty diatribe that infests their comment areas.

A segment of the population comments here. Probably not reflective of the rest of the general population.

And Matthew - do you really expect anyone at Columbian to respond at 9PM, on a Saturday, or any day? I do this for fun, don't get paid for it.

And no- no newspaper is going to cover everything you think is important.

by Omahkohkiaayo I'poyi : 6/14/09 7:53am - Report Abuse

All I have been asking for from The Columbian is what I ask of all media, public servants and anyone else who hold special powers and forms of influence, and, in the case of the media, provide for themselves what they say they are seeking to provide over others they cover: transparency and accountability. If, for example, one of your editors writes a column promoting a certain individual as president of a local community college, and if that editor is a friend of the person about whom he is writing, and has asked for a job reference from that person, then if ethics on conflicts of interest do not dictate that someone else write that editorial for you folks, then at least disclose those associations and, offer space to opposing points of view. If a local journalism teacher as been denied tenure for refusing to submit to prior restraint or pre-publication review and censorship of student articles by the College's head marketer and spokeperson and others in the administration, and if one of the trustees leading the denial of tenure, is an employee of The Columbian while other trustees are part of a network of associations that The Columbian owernership and employees are also involved, those facts should be disclosed. Or if a given business entity featured in what is supposed to be a bias-free news article, and that entity is a regular advertiser in The Columbian, or if the owners are part of a network of which The Columbian ownership and employees are also close associated, those facts should be disclosed (using a news story as basically an informercial for a particular and favored entity disadvantages other competitors of that entity and could constitute a form of hidden subsidy or tangible benefit to the detriment of competitors of that entity. Just as on the nightly business shows when they are discussing stocks, each analyst is asked if he or she owns any of the stock he or she is promoting, the same applies to The Columbian. That way we can be informed consumers of information, disinformation and/or lack of information and make up our own minds if there are patterns in subjects not covered or covered, scopes and depths of coverage, etc and interests and associations of The Columbian. Why is this so difficult to grasp and apply?

by K Gero : 6/14/09 7:59am - Report Abuse

Ham Chuck: You're beginning to spook me. I was ready to respond very similarly to what you stated. Thanks for saving my wrists!

by Matthew M : 6/14/09 8:01am - Report Abuse

@Ham - where did I say I expected them to respond at 9pm? My point was that Lou's responses are textbook each week, much as Omah stated. We rarely get responses to our points, rather that we are either A) missing the point of his column, or B) out of touch with a majority of the population (per the underlying message some see in this column).

It's not picking a fight. We've been asked to provide feedback here, in this column. And then when we do, our comments are de-valued. Sure, sometimes comments are harsh, but perhaps times such comments are valid and reflect a frustration the community has with the paper. I'm all for praise when deserved, and I comment on pieces at those times as well. But this is THE EDITOR of the paper. If he asks for feedback, he better be willing to get more than just good news all the time. The delivery of tough news, from your customers, is something that just comes with the territory.

by Matthew M : 6/14/09 8:08am - Report Abuse

@Omah - "...the same applies to The Columbian." The only problem here is that is should be "...the same SHOULD apply to The Columbian." You are correct that we have received no response to these questions in the past.

Another recent example. We were told via a comment from Lou (2 weeks ago) to expect an explanation of the Columbian's "..recent meeting of readers". How do they select such as esteemed group to give them feedback? Clearly these are much more respectable people in touch with the rest of Clark County. I'm sure they didn't just give all good news feedback. I'm sure they were critical of the paper, constructive comments and all. Hey, Lou, we're still waiting...

by B. Anker Jr. : 6/14/09 9:22am - Report Abuse

It would be comical if it wasn't so tragic that the editor of the local newspaper is opposed to any dialogue that isn't favorable to him or the work he is assigned to oversee. An ability to listen to the critics is mandatory and the business model of any newspaper is dependent on this exchange of information and opinion; yet the editor doesn't practice open dialogue and shuts down or tries to shut down his critics when their voices become too strong.

Is it any wonder the Columbian struggles when its editor is unwilling to embrace a basic component to the business of journalism?

by Peter Jay : 6/14/09 6:05pm - Report Abuse

It's to everyone's benefit that the Columbian doesn't reply to most comments short of keeping us from verbally maiming each other. So far, group consensus has occasionally been off-based although well-intended. For example, I agreed with the group who wanted the freedom to name roads and highways by honorary names. I've come to think that's not a sound idea especially when we covet out-of-area visitors..then we get into the whether or not the names politically correct.
Personally, I wouldn't want the task of figuring out how to subsidize continually negative comments. Let's see - the Columbian probably 24/7 expenses .. a few ads along the website frames?... not gonna cut it.

by Matthew M : 6/14/09 10:05pm - Report Abuse

@Peter - Feedback gets more online readership, which drives more online advertising revenue, which gets more feedback,....yeah, they don't need that cycle of cash.

I think the real reason that Lou doesn't let anyone else at the Columbian comment (and, yes, it is him, not the flimsy excuse that they are all busy) is precisely because they cannot defend some of their actions. I believe that most of the journalists are good natured, honest people. But editing, whether in print, radio or TV, can change any story. Otherwise how else can you explain the extremely lame excuse given to us about the absence of "the other side" in most stories? Oh, wait, that's right. Lou explained to us in a comment that is due to the fact that it is so difficult to find dissenting opinions sometime. <cough, cough>

by Ham Chuck : 6/15/09 3:07am - Report Abuse

@Matthew - I wasn't responding just to you, just expressing my frustrations as well as your own. I have never gotten a response from the writers of Columbian when I press for a more comprehensive article rather than one handed down from the AP wire.

I do guess that folks who post here are a segment, but not representative, of the total population at large. I mean, you get people like Helena Handbasket (which I'm quite sure is a dude) who calls me "Ham Sandwich" as his/her post script.

by K Gero : 6/15/09 5:06pm - Report Abuse

Lou: B. Anker Jr. teased me on another post that I didn't come to your rescue to show support with all the hashing and bashing going on. He even teased me about being part of your fan club. I didn't know you had a fan club, unless you take into account all these people who enjoy their freedoms of sharing their views with you as your fans. I also find it rather amusing how they all want you to provide constructive feedback regarding their responses. Sometimes, silence gets a better reaction by the audience as they begin discussing the issues of concern. Other times, silence may counteract your intentions and may be construed as slanted, ignorant or otherwise. I see it as entertaining, especially when I can actually see the different personalities in all the posters. Ham Chuck mentioned the nickname given by Helena Handbasket. This continues back and fort and gets silly. I saw one of Helen with hand in basket marrying... well I am sure you have seen it. I have heard so many silly names and have been called a few just because of our expressed. These are silly and are to be regarded as so. You could hardly call a ham sandwich as something vile and destructive. I am ranting on now. I'm done.

by K Gero : 6/15/09 5:15pm - Report Abuse

correction: I have heard so many silly names and have been called a few just because of our expressed "concerns and opinions."

Lou, one more comment for you. You stated that your web readers are mostly getting a free ride. That isn't entirely true. I for one, buy my paper off the newsstand AND check out the web and I am sure others do too. Would you consider supportive webbers getting a free ride just because they don't pay for the e-Edition?

by Lou Brancaccio : 6/16/09 8:28am - Report Abuse

K.,

I tend to agree with your points. I always prefer to have those who comment to speak together without my getting involved. I learn more when I'm listening not talking.

On another point, I usually try to use the word "most" when I say that web users "mostly" get a free ride. That's because, as you say, some web users also pay for the the print edition. In addition, the advertisers who advertise on the web site are only a tiny fraction of the overall money a media company needs to keep going.

Hope this helps. And keep the discussion going. And sorry about the fact that you sometimes get slammed for no other reason than you might happen to agree with me.

by K Gero : 6/16/09 9:11am - Report Abuse

Thanks Lou. The truth is, if I was worried about being slammed by those who do not agree with me, I wouldn't write my thoughts and concerns. How else are we going to be able to see how others feel in today's society? Issues don't get resolved unless people talk.

by dee little : 6/16/09 3:06pm - Report Abuse

KG

they also don't get resolved when demeaning, marginalizing and mocking the author.

by K Gero : 6/16/09 5:59pm - Report Abuse

...and we have definitely seen our share of that, too!

by Omahkohkiaayo I'poyi : 6/17/09 3:25pm - Report Abuse

Lou notes: "I tend to agree with your points. I always prefer to have those who comment to speak together without my getting involved. I learn more when I'm listening not talking."

This is what has some people going: disingenuousness. Lou has no trouble responding when a sensitive nerve is hit like metrics (responses to this column or "hits") going south. And not reponding, like inane, banal and Seinfeld-like columns are a way to play it safe with all except the crowd that does not appreciate people jobs with a public trust playing it safe to keep cushy jobs; but they are a bunch of malcontents--or can be portrayed as such--anyway.

by K Gero : 6/18/09 6:35am - Report Abuse

Omahkohkiaayo I'poyi: With all due respect as I highly respect your responses and input, I must remind you that Lou is not some celestial body who has the uncanny ability to be above the people of the land with answers to every opinion which crosses his path. Maybe sometimes, he just doesn't answer because he doesn't HAVE the answer. After all, he is human, too! Besides, have you ever noticed just how much public input is generated by his uncanny ability to wait it out? He is playing his cards EXACTLY on the money in order for people to generate their thoughts, opinions, regards and disregards by the way this column is set. It isn't worth chumping yourself till you are blue in the face to try and change what won't get changed. Things might get tweaked a bit, but they won't change as this column is surviving well by its own standard of design.

by Omahkohkiaayo I'poyi : 6/18/09 9:28am - Report Abuse

K Gero, thanks for your comments, I mean it, and this will be my last submission for reasons I will now present. Lou writes:

"Thanks, M.W. Obviously we love our print readers. They, along with our generous advertisers, pay most of the bills. Our Web users mostly are getting a free ride."

This is part of the problem and a whole "Culture of Entitlement" (the title of an op-ed of mine The Columbian once ran) that is manifested not only at the Columbian, but in both Vancouver City and Washington State governments. He says that those who write in but are not subscribers or paying at the paper stand are mostly free riders. But it takes time to write some of the submissions that are not just rants but do have concrete information, links or in some cases tips for story ideas. I know of one Columbian reporter trolling for stories at the student newspaper at Clark College; stories they had already run and that The Columbian would not run because one of their own is on the Clark Board of Trustees (not disclosed in the Columbian editorials and article on Ms Kopinski). Further, The Columbian adds say 163,000 readers (not subscribers) and then boldly claims "We deliver Clark County"; they are obviously counting hits as well as paperstand sales and subscribers and even claiming to "deliver" (I do not know what-readers I presume) Clark County to whom? Advertisers. So those who write in, taking their precious time on this earth, often writing on issues and with expertise and resumes in some areas that Lou and the gang at The Columbian could never hope to match, and also providing the hits that Lou and others count when the metric of reader responses does not look good are providing something of value that Lou has solicited. I agree with your point K Gero that Lou sometimes does not want to respond, sometimes cannot respond, and can pick any topic he darn well wants to pick as it is his column--then let the marketplaces for ideas and for time use unfold. All I asked for is be upfront. The topics picked are relatively safe because although controversy sells for some, it turns off others. And the job of a newspaper is not to inform, but to generate fillers between ads that bring/draw in people to read the ads and buy from the advertisers but without compromising the "brand" (wholesome, Family, independent) they are pushing that may or may not correspond with the reality. And to call those who take the time to write in to give their views, especially when specifically invited to do so and with their hits being counted, "free riders" shows a sense of entitlement and contempt for something being given by some readers, your own very thoughtful responses K Gero deserving special mention, more expensive than any subscription: time, expertise and concern on some vital issues of our times. Instead we get some whining about how some at the Columbian are worried about losing their jobs and homes (the real reason it appears for any cosmetic changes at The Columbian)-welcome to a large and expanding club.

Now I am done. Effective demand, which means both a willingness to buy (tastes and preferences) and ability to buy (income) requires, in the long run, not only something worth being bought, but earned trust that it will continue to be provided and supported at the levels that caused the intial buying of the product (one of the problems for the auto industry). Trust is earned not commanded or tricked with gimmicks--not in the long run.

As one great and real journalist whose life my father saved, who became a close friend of my father, and who I once had the honor of having lunch with when I was 11 years old, Edward R. Murrow, who never played it safe, used to say on his news sign offs:

"Goodbye and Good Luck". This paper does not have a solid foundation and thus not good propsects for the future.

by K Gero : 6/18/09 3:12pm - Report Abuse

...and how long has this newspaper been in circulation? I'm sorry, but our society is at a time where political turmoil, rotten economical times, terrorism, violent sexual offender articles and other articles on violent crimes and homes burning left and right hit up as big news. We now have the ability to voice our opinions with more than just writing a letter to the editor. When the paper began, bootlegging and Bessie the Cow caught trampling the neighbor's flower garden was big news. Times change and the newspapers go with the flow. Although your philosophy regarding the matter holds merit Omahkohkiaayo, not everyone has the credentials to follow in your understanding of whether a newspaper can continue or not. Many people have regular routines of picking up the paper at the corner market and enjoying their first morning cup of coffee or ritualize opening the front door in the early dawn to grab their paper before the sneaky neighbor decides they want to grab it. I for one enjoy my Sunday morning routine of waltzing through my favorite grocery store looking for bargains from the ads placed in our circular by the Columbian, only to buy the paper to take home and share with my husband and daughter while breakfast is sizzling in the frying pan and the coffee perks. As far as I am concerned, the solid foundation is established as long as local events are listed, news is provided and advertisements are there for the viewing, but I look at my routine as simplistic - and it works for me.

by Lou Brancaccio : 6/18/09 4:28pm - Report Abuse

Thanks all for the continued conversation. We'll miss ya Omah and I wish you well. I hope you find peace and happiness in whatever you do in the future!

by K Gero : 6/19/09 8:32am - Report Abuse

I have a final word for Omahkohkiaayo that I wish to share. First of all, thank you for your generously kind words. I know this will not be the last time we hear of you as you obviously have the ability to take your beliefs and convictions through hearty research and go further with it. Thanks for many heated debates of which have allowed all of us to think past the bubble. You have made a difference in people's lives and will continue to do so. In my eyes, I have seen the Columbian benefit from your postings as many more people have followed your readings with responses. You are greatly appreciated, Omahkohkiaayo I'poyi, and I am glad I have had the chance to converse with you as well as the others through the Columbian.com website. Peace always...