Saying goodbye to two long-time publications

Two venerable print institutions announced recently they were going away, victims of changing times and consumer buying patterns.


The first is the Youngstown Vindicator, a paper with a storied history dating to 1869. According to its general manager, Mark A. Brown, the publication succumbed to many of the same forces that have closed almost 1,800 local newspapers since 2004 — dwindling circulation, rising costs and a migration of advertising online.


When a newspaper folds in 2019, competitors do not cheer. This is because people working in print recognize the hard realities of the industry and the vital importance of what newspapers do. Papers are more than a wrapper for retail flyers or a place to park anniversary announcements, as important as those functions are. Newspapers, at their best, provide the spine that supports a community — a place for people to be informed of the stories of the day, to see the good (and sometimes the bad) that their neighbors and friends do, and to be apprised of actions by local governments and elected officials.


That last piece, the watchdog function of the press, may be the most important. While the majority of elected officials, I’m convinced, seek office with the best interests of their constituents at heart, a small minority are engaged in shenanigans, and the presence of a reporter in the back of the room and an impending headline on the front page can be a powerful reminder of accountability.


Erin Keane of the Salon Media Group wrote last October about “news deserts,” those communities where no local paper exists. Like food deserts, where lack of comprehensive grocery services forces residents to make less healthy dietary choices, news deserts drive readers to social media, where information is often less accurate and more biased.


Social media has its place, of course. If you want to see dozens of pictures of Aunt Selma and Uncle Joey’s vacation or a four-minute video of your neighbor’s chihuahua balancing a cracker on its nose, then Facebook and Instagram can’t be beat.


If you want coverage of substantive news of the day, however, you’re better off turning to a local newspaper, either in print or online.


Most newspapers, like this one, have a substantial online presence. Unfortunately, because of missteps in the early days of the Internet, many publishers conditioned readers to get news online for free, under the assumption that advertising would bear the cost.


It hasn’t worked out that way, yet many readers still believe news should still be free, or nearly so. They don’t recognize that stories cost money and time to research, write, photograph, and edit. A piece that can be read in four minutes may represent dozens of hours of work over several days to produce.



The second publication to announce its imminent demise is Mad magazine, which will limp along with two more original issues and then a few reprint editions to fulfill subscriber obligations before folding altogether.


Readers of a certain age will certainly remember the heyday of Mad, when its self-styled “Usual Gang of Idiots” skewered pop culture, sports and politics each month, along with copious paperback reprints of popular features like Dave Berg’s “Lighter Side of ...” and Sergio Aragones’ visual gags.


In a way, it could be argued that Mad was too successful. Its snarky attitude is ubiquitous enough today to survive without the magazine, most evident in the thousands of Mad-like memes posted online.


When Ivanka Trump weaseled her way into conversations with world leaders at the G20 summit recently, or when President Trump asserted on July 4 that airports existed during the Revolutionary War, nobody had to wait two months or more for Mad’s writers and artists to skewer them. Images showed up almost immediately: Ivanka talking to Lincoln and watching Martin Luther King Jr. speak, Washington crossing the Delaware accompanied by a phalanx of fighter jets.


That’s Mad all the way, just without the magazine.


The Internet isn’t going away, and the disruptive effect it has on traditional media isn’t ebbing, either. Nobody wants to be the last person manufacturing buggy whips or the last person defending their necessity. When something no longer works or is no longer necessary, the market dictates its exit — a newspaper or magazine included.


But, at the bare minimum, if consumers like something and value its presence — a local or national publication, a small business, a service — they should support it with their patronage and dollars if and when they can.



Otherwise, they risk something they love becoming the next Vindy or Mad.


chris.schillig@yahoo.com


@cschillig on Twitter