On The Courant

I'm sitting in the library with today's Sunday Courant and the first thing I read is Professor McEnroe's column. After finishing it, I glance at the bottom and see 'You can hear Colin McEnroe's talk show weekdays from 3 to 6 pm on WTIC-AM 1080 in the Hartford area.' Thinking I possibly have an old paper - though I know its not because the column is on a fresh political issue- I look at the date and confirm it is the Sept. 27th edition. So within a few minutes, I've already spotted a misprint. As Professor McEnroe can confirm, his show is no longer on WTIC and is now on WNPR. So add another foolish mistake to a seemingly long list that the Courant has been making recently. 

Before I get into the meat of the assigned readings, my initial impressions on the actual Courant and its website are mixed. The website reminds me too much of a local tv news website, too light on real journalistic content and instead relying too heavily on the 'flash factor', with the 'top pictures' a tempting distraction from the meatier and more important articles. In contrast to the NY Times website, its a bit amateurish, but nowhere near as confusing as the website of my home state paper, the Providence Journal. 

Nevertheless, the website is organized in a way in which article specialization is an asset; its easy to find what you want to read where. The combination of the unspecialized 'latest news section' and the specialized 'politics, sports, etc.' bars at the top make for a comprehensive look at what the Courant is offering for the day. I would give the website a B+, with kudos for relatively smart organization. 

As far as the print version goes, I'm glad they have returned to the classic 'Hartford Courant' title at the top instead of the tabloid-esque sidebar that they had a few months ago. It gives the paper its sense of self back. The Courant is America's oldest continuously published newspaper, and to preserve its aura it needs to appear as stately as it thinks it is. 

I don't like the 'Quick Take' at the bottom of the front page. I understand that our collective attention span is dropping, but this only perpetuates its decline. The Quick Take should be on A2. The three top stories should stay where they are, and instead of the Quick Take, two Courant 'specialities' that make the paper different from other media outlets - its columnists- should carry the front page. I don't understand why they are promoting an article written by 'Tribune papers'. That kills the Courant brand. The article, or one like it, can be found in any Sunday paper or on any website. You can't find the words and insights of Jon Lender and Colin McEnroe anywhere but the Courant. Its comforting and familiar for readers to see two faces they know when they take a quick glance at the paper. An expected thought process among a wavering buyer/subscriber: "Oh, there's Colin McEnroe! I wonder what he's thinking about today. I'll start to read his article... etc." To remain viable, the Courant needs to continue its emphasis on the local and the unique- the scoop that really gauges the Connecticut of the day. I think its doing that, but not as much as it should. 

Its disheartening to see all the controversy that the paper is going through, and in no means do I condone their missteps. But it seems to me the blame finger should only be pointed at one source - our collective self. The reason the Courant has become a 'shadow of its former self' and is going through such hard times is because of a drop in circulation and revenue. Its impossible to stay the same with less resources. In last week's class, one of my classmates noted how her parents had recently cancelled their subscription to the paper because they were so fed up with the paper. With all due respect, I can't think of a more foolish move. 

For a large number of Connecticut households, a Courant subscription is a small expense. The marginal benefits should outweigh the marginal costs. If we want the metropolitan newspaper to continue to be the leading investigator, informer, cultural trendsetter, and comprehensive force it should be, its only wise to support it as best as we can within our means. Only then can it continue to compete.

Last semester, I interned at the State Capitol for a CT State Representative. I was dismayed by how many of the workers throughout the Legislative Office Building read the Courant for free online exclusively. If anyone should have a vested interest in the paper's success, it should be those at the heart of the state government. The Courant has historically been Connecticut's democratic watchdog. After hearing so many legislative workers dismiss having a subscription as an unnecessary expense, I can't help but feel a bit concerned for the future of the paper. How is Joe Q. Public going to be convinced to stay a subscriber if those that work for the 'movers and shakers' of Connecticut aren't subscribers themselves? 

But for now, the Courant still has a grip -whether weak or strong- on the state. 155,000 people still subscribe to it daily, and 222,000 receive it on Sunday.  Add all the Internet hits its website gets, and you probably still have a robust, if troubled, media outlet. Its the near future that should frighten.