Comments on: Dyson at Large: Subbing nightmare at JP weekly

By: Adamski

Adamski — Thu, 07 Jun 2012 15:16:48 +0000

Do any JP papers have a down-table anymore? There are no down-table subs because there are no subs except in the hubs. Out of touch Mr Dyson. As out of touch as JP bosse!

Report this comment

By: Steve Dyson

Steve Dyson — Thu, 07 Jun 2012 14:21:54 +0000

Glad you’ve got that off your chest, ‘Bagless’. Nice moniker! Seriously, all comments welcome.

Report this comment

By: Bagless Vacuum

Bagless Vacuum — Thu, 07 Jun 2012 13:27:00 +0000

Having read Mr Dyson’s latest blog, I have – for the fist time – been moved to comment. It’s not his observations are without merit, it’s the smug self-satisfied nature of his critique which truly grates. It needs context. The context of Steve’s solid but unspectacular journalistic career and the context of the only ‘journalism’ – albeit, faux journalism – we can to refer to when assessing the master blogger’s own ‘quality control’. Take a look at his pervious blog entitled: The Euro Millions headline quiz. Not only were his suggestions poor, they were by common consent entirely misjudged. And those misjudgements were made at his leisure, without deadlines and unaffected by the kind of staffing, commercial, IT and resource issues which affect the quality of work produced at papers up and down the country. By all means present an honest assessment, but he should temper that with respect for real journalists operating in very challenging times and a self-awareness to inform that, when all said and done, he’s ‘not all that’…

Report this comment

By: Ex-hack

Ex-hack — Wed, 06 Jun 2012 15:23:15 +0000

Steve,

Your comments are totally fair and it’s good of you to point out it’s not the fault of the journalists for the most part. You’ve hit the nail on the head; it’s the lack of guidance and support from on-site editors, no dedicated subs and the dodgy template system.

However this drop in quality across JP titles because of cutbacks and changes has been the case for a few years and will only get worse. I agree, the shoddy quality it creates will only lead to reduced sales but that’s a journalist talking – the ‘powers that be’ don’t make that logical connection and don’t seem to see the bigger picture. Bluntly, as long as savings are made in the here and now by chopping senior staff, they couldn’t care less. In the rare event they do notice, it’ll be a case of scold the journalists rather than work out the problem lies with their company policies.

Report this comment

By: Aman

Aman — Wed, 06 Jun 2012 14:30:25 +0000

Well said Steve.

Highlighting weaknesses is very important and can only improve things.
Whether JP will bother to learn lessons or take the criticism constructively, who knows?
I hope they do. Both Eastbourne and Hastings are big towns and deserve their own editors.

Report this comment

By: Ex-reporter

Ex-reporter — Wed, 06 Jun 2012 14:16:18 +0000

Wow, I’m very glad to be away from JP and its hated template pages. The staff at my old paper did their best after the subs were axed and the horrible, rigid templates were introduced, but there was simply not time for every piece of copy to be read as thoroughly as before – and in my experience, getting a non-template layout for a page was rare. To their credit, I think the guys I worked with do a great job with what they’ve now got, but it’s easy to see how the JP’s new systems could bring about examples like the one above.

Unless JP changes tactics, it’s hard to see how all this can lead to anything other than: readers stop reading > advertisers stop advertising > JP cuts more > quality drops > readers stop reading > …

Report this comment

By: Steve Dyson

Steve Dyson — Wed, 06 Jun 2012 13:52:41 +0000

Many thanks to all for commenting. For those who feel the review is unsympathetic, please note the par that reads: “I am sure that the journalists working for the Observer aren’t happy with this, but what looked to me like an unfortunate clash of remote subbing, inflexible templates and scarce resource for proper proof-reading badly let them down.” The point of this review was not to blame journalists but to signal that something in the process – namely resource levels – has gone wrong. There is no publishing excuse for shoddy desking, lay-out and (lack of) proof-reading that confuses… this will only hit readership and advertising. We all know that companies have to rationalise and organise affordable production; but no-one – least of all JP – want to see this pushed to limits where things get embarrassing. That won’t help print, but nor will it help online. Hopefully highlighting issues will attract proper attention/review.

Report this comment

By: Adamski

Adamski — Wed, 06 Jun 2012 13:28:39 +0000

I’ve heard of JP papers being so short-staffed that employees without any NCTJ training have written splashes. Regularly.

Report this comment

By: GladImOutOfIt

GladImOutOfIt — Wed, 06 Jun 2012 11:03:54 +0000

Splitting stories like that used to be an absolute taboo because, as you point out, they confuse the reader. Now, however, it’s not just the Hastings Observer that does it – the Guardian (the national one) has been doing it for ages as a design feature and it’s no less confusing there. Mind, they often stick ads in strange places halfway up pages and so on – you’ll do anything if you’re desperate for the dosh.

Report this comment

By: Ex-Insider

Ex-Insider — Wed, 06 Jun 2012 10:53:16 +0000

The Hastings Observer group sliced the top off the mountain three years ago, getting rid of an editor, production editor and three sub editors in an early JP cost-cutting exercise. There was bound to be an on-going consequence.

Report this comment

By: Aman

Aman — Wed, 06 Jun 2012 10:31:30 +0000

It’s not the same in every JP paper – that’s a lazy generalisation.
Many JP papers still have editors and deputies who proof read thoroughly. There is still pride in this industry.

However, it’s sad to see the cull of northern editors and the Observer should be a warning of what happens when you axe editors and quality control.

The Observer may look better when the new designs come in, but content will only get worse as reporters are forced to pad boxes even more.

Report this comment

By: Streatham2

Streatham2 — Wed, 06 Jun 2012 10:26:23 +0000

I always pick up the Observer when I’m in Hastings, and the Herald while I’m in Eastbourne, and I happen to have seen both in recent weeks. I was struck by how chunky they both were, with lots of news and advertising seeming to be bouyant. I also felt that the writing could be a bit flabby, and the Herald’s use of the same (boring) picture of an ambulance outside a hospital to illustrate health stories on different pages was feeble.

But I still felt jealous of the two towns having these papers. My local paid for had only 20 non-sport news items last week (plus two pages on the jubilee)

Report this comment

By: Curious

Curious — Wed, 06 Jun 2012 10:18:05 +0000

I’m sorry ClubStyle but you can’t blame Steve for telling it how it is. If his reviews aren’t candid and honest, what would be the point of having them?
People who read his reviews know the intolerable strain that people have to work under these days. Many editions have lost their editors and are like rudderless ships, stumbling from deadline to deadline.
No-one is setting out to criticise staff but the subbing blunders in this edition are so rudimentary you have to wonder if the pages were designed by someone on work experience.
As for hopes of an Ashley Highfield about-turn on cuts that have gone too far, I’m afraid that’s just wishful thinking. He’s saddled with debt and the cuts haven’t finished yet so you can forget about reversing any.
It would be nice to have a positive word to say but…

Report this comment