News-Record.com

John,
While I agree that a "not invented here" syndrome has led to pack journalism and an inefficient use of civic resources, I'm concerned that we will have fewer eyes watching state government as a result of the political staff merger. I hope that either professionals or amateurs will fill any gap in authoritative efforts to hold powerful people accountable.
Best,
Ryan

Ryan,

If Charlotte and Raleigh want to get together and use their resources to better effect, is that a bad thing or a good thing? Well, if they keep staffing at the same level it is now, it's probably to the good. (Someone else can argue whether that's likely.) The net effect, if they do it right, could be to cover a better depth and breadth of government, more than their competition allowed them to do.

But the question of what's going on with Charlotte and Raleigh misses a bigger point, which is that readers across the state have been seeing a decline in state government coverage over the past decade that would go largely unnoticed if you live in the big urban centers or pay attention to only those papers.

Fewer eyes are watching state government that they were only 10 years ago, even as the powers and responsibilities of state government have grown. Unless you live down east you might not have noticed that in the past year Wilmington has not replaced the staff writer it used to have at the capitol, who went on to other work. They're getting some stories done, as I understand it, by a freelancer and covering some things with their staff back home. But that doesn't make up for having an aggressive, knowledgeable field resource on the scene.

The McClatchy paper's combined total of seven field reporters dedicated to governance beats is more than any other outlet by far. AP has two during legislative session, while the News and Record, WUNC-Radio, Fayetteville, Winston-Salem and Asheville all have one reporter. (I'm leaving out a few outlets, like WUNC-TV, where I'm not sure of the staffing level, but I can say with certainty that no one is increasing their crews.)

And there are some outlets like Wilmington who lost their staffing in the past five or 10 years. Media General's smaller papers used to have a reporter of their own but do not. Freedom newspapers have reduced their staffing from two reporters to one. Publishers and shareholders have made this thinning inevitable. But since I want to stay employed, I'm going to reserve my diatribe on publishers and newspaper owners for another day.

Are Armatures going to pick up some of this? Yes, in a way. They'll engage with stories that interest them from a political or topical angle - they already do that now. Are they a substitute for dedicated eyes on target, someone who has an interest in a particular geographic readership? No, but they're a good asset in the field.

So the Charlotte and Raleigh merger could be great, or they could be the big bullet wound that you fear. But state government journalism is already bleeding out from a thousand cuts. The really depressing bit is we're better off here in North Carolina than in some other states.

The cutbacks that Mark describes in state government coverage in Raleigh were beginning when I covered the legislature for the News & Record, more than a decade ago. I believe the N&R itself, once upon a time, had two reporters in Raleigh.

I fear the pattern will continue with the merged N&O/Observer state government coverage, long term: Management will come to view the merged staffs as one staff, and then begin paring it down, reporter by reporter, to cut costs.

The same thing is happening where I live and work now, in D.C.: The number of reporters covering Washington has been shrinking. See this story, from Politico: http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0208/8715.html

It's troubling to look out over the House chamber here during a vote, when all the members are milling around on the floor, and contemplate that no one back home is really scrutinizing what most of these individual lawmakers do day after day.

Sorry, let me add one clarification to my previous post:

The number of Washington correspondents from local newspapers has been shrinking. The number of credentialed print reporters in Washington has held pretty steady, mostly because specialty publications like my own employer, Congressional Quarterly, have added staff.

But these publications, by and large, are not covering individual lawmakers or delegations in the kind of depth that a local reporter would ... and are not really writing for the general public. And that leaves individual lawmakers without someone from back home watching closely what they do and holding them accountable on behalf of their constituents.

John is correct: the N+R's staffing used to be a two-person office, although that was more than 10 years ago and before I moved to the state. Part of the same trend, though.

When staffs merge, editors will tell you that the combined newspaper will be better.

It won't.

I agree with all your comments -- and let me say what a joy it is to have this discussion, unlike some of the others on this blog.

I was really referring to the duplication of having two bright reporters on two different papers covering the same story. If one could keep an eye on the governor while the other rooted through travel records, that is a benefit to the public. If the combination of efforts results in editors deciding that they can do without fewer reporters, that's no benefit.

As one of the editors who makes that kind of call, it's a hard one. We have way more stories than we have reporters, and every editor knows that. And it's not just Raleigh. City Hall, the county and schools all control a lot of money and there are way fewer reporters watching them.

All agreed, John. I know how hard these calls are in this day and age. I'll be interested to see how Raleigh and Charlotte handle it. Hope I'm wrong.