By Patricia Lee Sharpe
This week, in the same big fat Sunday edition of the New York Times, there were two stories on the Toyota debacle, which seems to have the legs of a back-to-back marathon runner. One story was truly worth reading. It told me what I needed to know in order to understand the cascade of recalls by Toyota. The other piece? Fluff. A waste of trees, ink and everything else. Too much of this superficial sort of “commentary” and my paid subscription is not likely to be extended.
It costs two arms and two legs to subscribe to a newspaper these days, which is why a lot of people try to get their news on the cheap from the Internet. I don’t mind paying. In fact, I consider it my duty. I want to keep those batteries of good reporters on the job, digging up the dirt and keeping our governments—local, state and national plus countless authorities, etc.—honest. As for the commentary, the editorials, the op-eds, for the most part I don’t need a newspaper for that, although there are a few columnists I read with respect and pleasure and learn from. Mostly I can do the analysis myself—and just as well, modesty be damned.
Story One reveals that Toyota has a “pattern” of “slow response on safety issues.” It also provides the all-important evidence for that very serious conclusion. Single incidents may be tragic, but “patterns” are tragedy repeated over and over. It seems that Toyota has been living a lie for many years, by labeling “safety” problems as “customer satisfaction” issues. Every current and prospective Toyota customer needs to know this. What is happening now, this tsunami of recalls running to many hundreds of thousands of cars, is the end result of a decade long culture of denial and deception. Evidently the botched cars can be fixed. The bigger question is this: can the company culture be fixed? This vital story occupied about 61 inches of text, headlines and photos (in 5 col. equivalents).
Story Two plays with the reaction to the Toyota debacle as an instance of mass schadenfreude– which is to say, taking pleasure in another’s downfall, those on a pleasure trip in this case being non-owners and non-manufacturers of Camrys, Priuses, Tundras, etc., etc. Supposedly, everyone loves to see arrogant front runners stumble. This piece of fluff, including photos and headlines, occupied about 80 inches of text (in 5 col. equivalents).
Think of it! The utterly worthless Story Two occupies about 30% more space than the all important Story One. What’s more, the bit of fluff got nearly twice as much space as the 48 inches allotted to the paper’s best op-ed writer.
Story One shows us why American journalism is admired and treasured and why people are still willing to pay for it. Story Two shows us how great American newspapers stoop to pander and die.
This week, in the same big fat Sunday edition of the New York Times, there were two stories on the Toyota debacle, which seems to have the legs of a back-to-back marathon runner. One story was truly worth reading. It told me what I needed to know in order to understand the cascade of recalls by Toyota. The other piece? Fluff. A waste of trees, ink and everything else. Too much of this superficial sort of “commentary” and my paid subscription is not likely to be extended.
It costs two arms and two legs to subscribe to a newspaper these days, which is why a lot of people try to get their news on the cheap from the Internet. I don’t mind paying. In fact, I consider it my duty. I want to keep those batteries of good reporters on the job, digging up the dirt and keeping our governments—local, state and national plus countless authorities, etc.—honest. As for the commentary, the editorials, the op-eds, for the most part I don’t need a newspaper for that, although there are a few columnists I read with respect and pleasure and learn from. Mostly I can do the analysis myself—and just as well, modesty be damned.
Story One reveals that Toyota has a “pattern” of “slow response on safety issues.” It also provides the all-important evidence for that very serious conclusion. Single incidents may be tragic, but “patterns” are tragedy repeated over and over. It seems that Toyota has been living a lie for many years, by labeling “safety” problems as “customer satisfaction” issues. Every current and prospective Toyota customer needs to know this. What is happening now, this tsunami of recalls running to many hundreds of thousands of cars, is the end result of a decade long culture of denial and deception. Evidently the botched cars can be fixed. The bigger question is this: can the company culture be fixed? This vital story occupied about 61 inches of text, headlines and photos (in 5 col. equivalents).
Story Two plays with the reaction to the Toyota debacle as an instance of mass schadenfreude– which is to say, taking pleasure in another’s downfall, those on a pleasure trip in this case being non-owners and non-manufacturers of Camrys, Priuses, Tundras, etc., etc. Supposedly, everyone loves to see arrogant front runners stumble. This piece of fluff, including photos and headlines, occupied about 80 inches of text (in 5 col. equivalents).
Think of it! The utterly worthless Story Two occupies about 30% more space than the all important Story One. What’s more, the bit of fluff got nearly twice as much space as the 48 inches allotted to the paper’s best op-ed writer.
Story One shows us why American journalism is admired and treasured and why people are still willing to pay for it. Story Two shows us how great American newspapers stoop to pander and die.