Sharing is caring: Part II

So about three weeks ago, the state’s largest dailies, the Tulsa World and The Oklahoman (in Oklahoma City), entered into a content-sharing agreement. So far, so good, it seems.

It is very strange to see their bylines in our newspaper and on our Web site, as I’m sure it’s weird for them to see ours, too. This measure, although not unusual these days, is hard to get used to. But if it helps us all keep our jobs, I am for it. While change is hard, it is also necessary, especially in such dire circumstances.

What’s important is that each paper retains its distinct identity, and I think we’ve accomplished that so far.

I recently blogged about the Fort Worth Star-Telegram and the Dallas Morning News sharing sports content and how I wasn’t really in favor of it for them. But the situation in Oklahoma is much different.

The World’s and Oklahoman’s sports beats don’t overlap nearly as much as those in DFW, which is why content-sharing has been minimal so far for our department. It has mainly been getting photos from them so far.

What this change boils down to is that all Americans (newspaper folk included) are making adjustments. We are beset by our cold, empty pockets and we are considering changes that once seemed radical – cutting cable, Internet or dining out. Or, we’re postponing “American dream”-type stuff, like college, buying a house, opening your own business, or starting or enlarging a family.

Due to this recession (When does it officially become a depression? When we start saving pieces of string?), many businesses are realizing that if they don’t find ways to make money, they suffer. When industry giants Google and Microsoft lay off thousands, you know it has hit everyone. And don’t forget the Arena Football League, which canceled its season.

All I know is that I can’t wait for someone to figure out how newspapers can profit better off of the Web. (I don’t think that genius will be me. I’ve pondered, and I got nothing.)

Once the solution is found, then we’ll be OK. We’ve got the content and the talent, just no strategy. Hopefully, newspapers nationwide can ride out the storm of this downward economy and find brighter skies ahead.

Sharing is caring

The Dallas Morning News and Fort Worth Star-Telegram announced this week they are going to start sharing local sports coverage. I know they aren’t the first big market to do this, but since I was raised in DFW, the area holds a special place in my heart and I feel the urge to talk about it. The DMN will take Mavericks and Stars gamers, and the S-T will take the Rangers, and Cowboys coverage will stay as is.

The news of this deal was discussed briefly at work on Monday. The general reaction was, “Wow. It’s that bad, huh?”

When you think about it from a purely business standpoint, it does seem redundant to have two newspapers in the same area covering the same game. But hopping in bed with your competition is a drastic solution.

It hurts the readers because they are losing a voice. Just because game reports are supposed to be unbiased doesn’t mean the story can’t be told in different ways. Reporters must also retain the drive to get scoops despite the lowered level of competition.

Thankfully, each paper will still have its own columnists. Although game reports are important (and often thankless), columnists are vital to the paper. They analyze what went right (or wrong) and help the public form opinions. Columnists also help cement the paper’s brand and form its identity.

I always appreciated the variety of sports coverage in DFW, even if it was just a straight gamer. From a journalist’s point of view, it was interesting to see what each writer thought was most vital to the story. Sometimes it is obvious: a game-winning field goal, overtime goal or buzzer-beater. Nevertheless, I’ll be sad to see some of the variety disappear.