Friday, February 27, 2009
News / News Bites Zorn v. Rhodes
Posted by Michael Miner on 02.27.09 at 01:44 PM
The Tribune's Eric Zorn calls Beachwood Reporter's Steve Rhodes a "perpetually seething self-styled visionary."
Rhodes replies, "I'm not a self-styled visionary, I'm a real one."
And beyond debating Rhodes's credentials as a man of tomorrow, the two writers engage in the sort of riveting colloquy about journalism and where it's going that requires two smart people who don't like each other much. Must reading if the future of news is something you've been wondering about yourself.
Update: Zorn comes back swinging.
Comments (12)
Showing 1-12 of 12
This contest is a mismatch. Rhodes crushes Zorn, who is clearly out of his league. Zorn should be more careful about who he chooses to call out.
like
dislike
Eric Zorn is very clear about this issue. My favorite observation by Zorn is "Steve Rhodes is virtually the only principled, intelligent journalist in the whole town with the exception of those who see things just as he sees them." This discussion is way too depressing for those of us who love newspapers. To suggest that any of these Internet startups even come close to doing what the Chicago Tribune or any major daily papers do is absurd. And to say that six people could do what the Tribune does for $2 million dollars is completely and utterly ridiculous
I actually like both these guys, and agree they're both smart and emminently readable. But I will say this: Rhodes is in fact "perpetually seething" and is convinced he's got most-if not all-the answers. And Zorn, true to the title bestowed by Steinberg, does come across at times as the sanctimonius "professor." The perfect pair to go at it hammer-and-tong, in my mind. And frankly, both probably would agree about much more than that upon which they disagree. Nothing like a good pissing match, eh.
Hi, Susan, None of the internet startups come close to the Tribune or Sun-Times. This is true. It's also the point. A startup has to do something different, often taking just a piece of what some existing business is doing and focus just on that. Six people can't do what the Tribune does. But maybe they can do what the Tribune's sports staff does, or what the Tribune's political staff does.
a mismatch? well, maybe ... but not too sure which is the real heavyweight. while it's true both of these talented & remarkable men have entries in Wikipedia®, rhodes doesn't have a single famous relative of note...how can the man compete? http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eric_zorn http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Steve_Rhodes_(journalist)
sorry, let me try that rhodes link again...if it doesn't work, you're on your own. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Steve_Rhodes_(journalist)
rhodes is interesting the first few months you read him. after that, though, what's he got? really, the same old piss and moaning, day after day from him. he then torpedoes whatever credibility he purports to have when he says, 'hire me.'
I question Zorn's inclusion of Talking Points Memo on his list of offenders he wishes the papers could have quashed. TPM pays a number of reporters and has broken many stories.
@ryanwc I wasn't saying TPM is an offender or that I wish the papers could have or would have quashed them. My quote was/is: "As for (the charge of) newspaper companies squandering their advantage, I don’t know, in retrospect, if and how newspaper companies could have (or even if they should have) been so innovative and forward thinking that they would prevented the appearance of Chicagoist, Gapers Block and Beachwood or, nationally, Drudge, Google News, Talking Points Memo, Real Clear Politics and so on." The point being not the TPM is an "offender" as such but part of the competitive landscape that sprung up in this new era and that would have sprung up no matter how aggressive or comprehensive the Tribune or the Reader or any existing news organization tried to be. And I'm not at all saying this -- the existence of these outlets -- is a bad thing as such any more than, say, the Reader would argue that the existence of RedEye or TimeOut Chicago are bad things, despite the competitive pressures they put on the Reader. What I'm saying in this passage is that I don't think it's fair to say "look at all this competition! If only you'd been good enough at what you were trying to do, you'd never have had any competition and wouldn't be in the fix you're in now." To some extent, yes, any now-struggling publication has to look back and see missed opportunities and bum decisions. But I'm not persuaded that we -- speaking, unofficially on behalf of the Tribune -- squandered significant opportunities.
Eric, Sure, and I agree with part of your point. You had merely included TPM under a list of unforeseen challenges. I'm trying to draw a very different line than you, Mike, and many. I don't want to save newspapers. I want to save reporting. So I think that to lump sites like drudge and gapersblock with tpm, whatever you may be saying about them, muddies waters that I'd rather see through more clearly. I also disagree with you that papers did what everything they could have. That's why I posted in the newer thread the link to the NYTimes piece about papers suing to enforce their copyrights. I think they should have done so long ago. I'm going back to that thread to post a breakout of what I see as 5 separate issues for papers. They do bleed into each other, but they offer distinct challenges, and I think that defining terms is very important here, and it hasn't been done.
Eric's motives are pure, but Steve Rhodes is the Andy Martin of Chicago journalism -- to engage him is to give him a victory. I stopped trying to counter Rhodes' falsehoods and fantasies a long time ago. He has one thought -- everyone sucks and he's a true visionary. Does anyone believe that -- beside John Kass, that is?
