Weakly Flogging Volume 2

[RJC]

Re: Weakly Flogging Volume 2

Unbelievable. Likanui, you have outdone yourself.
The idea was to give an overview of what's going on with the Superferry. I think he did a perfectly good job.
And for whatever it's worth, that was the first story Noah has ever had printed. He's an aspiring journalist who graduated from college in June, and we're giving him an opportunity.
I hope you're proud of yourself.

[LikaNui]

Re: Weakly Flogging Volume 2

Unbelievable. Likanui, you have outdone yourself.

Mahalo nui! We media watchdogs do try to be of service.

The idea was to give an overview of what's going on with the Superferry. I think he did a perfectly good job.

That was nowhere near to being an "overview." It was a rehash of things that have been asked and answered countless times over the past years, so it was very clearly not a "good job." So you tell us, RJC: what was in the article -- specifically -- that was new and newsworthy?
Answer: Zilch. Zip. Nada.

And for whatever it's worth, that was the first story Noah has ever had printed. He's an aspiring journalist who graduated from college in June, and we're giving him an opportunity.

Then you should also give him some EDITING so he can learn!
And by the way, I don't care if the article is about the SuperFerry or coqui frogs or whatever. The point is that there was no point to the article. No news, nothing new, no insightful commentary to make readers re-think their position one way or another, nothing. After I read it, I knew I'd read it all before, dozens and dozens of times. If you're going to really try to help this rookie, give him some guidance! Any editor worth his salt would've sat down with Noah and told him why the article wasn't suitable for publication; had him go back and try again, or give him a different topic that could offer something new. You are doing him no favors at all if you think you're preparing him for a career in journalism when you publish tripe like that. No major publication would've accepted the article. You're misleading the boy. How's he ever going to learn to be a real journalist? Shame on you.

I hope you're proud of yourself.

A lot more proud of myself than you folks at the Weakly should be of yourselves.

(Oh, and thanks to all of you who gave me green reputation points on my post yesterday. Wow!
Let's see if RJC or someone else from the Weakly will actually answer my questions.)

[RJC]

Re: Weakly Flogging Volume 2

Thanks for the feedback. We'll endeavor to be worthier of our salts in the future.

Not sure what else to say. The paper hasn't covered Superferry, and our editorial assumption is that our readers are not necessarily reading the other local dailies--a sizeable percentage of our readers get their news from the Weekly. For that reason, I thought it was fine to give some space to an overview of what the issues are and where we are with Superferry. Sorry you didn't agree.

[RJC]

Re: Weakly Flogging Volume 2

(Oh, and thanks to all of you who gave me green reputation points on my post yesterday. Wow!
Let's see if RJC or someone else from the Weakly will actually answer my questions.)

I guess I also want to say that there's something fairly pathetic about a person who derives pleasure from levelling insults at those who are, after all, just ordinary people doing their best. I hope there there are enough "green reputation points" out there to cancel out the shame you must feel, on some level, for being so fundamentally unkind.

[LikaNui]

Re: Weakly Flogging Volume 2

The paper hasn't covered Superferry, and our editorial assumption is that our readers are not necessarily reading the other local dailies--a sizeable percentage of our readers get their news from the Weekly.

You're kidding, right? You can't be serious. Please tell us that you're joking. If that truly is the Weakly's "editorial assumption" then I'm flabbergasted at the editorial naivete.

And by the way, the statement that the Weakly "hasn't covered Superferry" is blatantly and absolutely false. You're relatively new there, but you should've looked in the library of back issues before making that statement.

I guess I also want to say that there's something fairly pathetic about a person who derives pleasure from levelling insults at those who are, after all, just ordinary people doing their best.

That's a bit confusing. When you say "ordinary people" are you referring to Noah, yourself, or the entire staff? No matter, really, because we're all just "ordinary people doing (our) best." And don't take my comments as insults. I'm trying to teach you the same way you're trying to teach Noah.
But here's the thing. You said that you're mentoring this young writer, and I say again that you're doing him no favors by letting think that article was fine. I can tell you from experience on both sides of the mentoring coin that you have to use 'tough love'. Constructive criticism is the only real way for Noah to learn. Approving a failure is not.

[LikaNui]

Re: Weakly Flogging Volume 2

The paper hasn't covered Superferry, and our editorial assumption is that our readers are not necessarily reading the other local dailies--a sizeable percentage of our readers get their news from the Weekly.

I wanted to separate this from the discussion about Noah.
Now, you claim the Weakly hasn't covered Superferry before. While that's patently false (as is the last part of your sentence above), your comment begs the question: If that was true, how on earth does the Weakly justify not reporting on the Superferry for all these years???
Exactly what service would that gap in reporting a major story provide to your readers who allegedly get their news from the Weakly?
I can't wait to see the answer to this one.

[LikaNui]

Re: Weakly Flogging Volume 2

Fascinating item in Ian Lind's blog today:

"Congratulations and "good luck" to Chris Haire, incoming editor at Honolulu Weekly. He's been a prolific and imaginative columnist and reporter in the alternative weekly world, editor of Metrobeat, a 20,000 circulation weekly in Greenville, South Carolina".

[LikaNui]

Re: Weakly Flogging Volume 2

I wanted to separate this from the discussion about Noah.
Now, you claim the Weakly hasn't covered Superferry before. While that's patently false (as is the last part of your sentence above), your comment begs the question: If that was true, how on earth does the Weakly justify not reporting on the Superferry for all these years???
Exactly what service would that gap in reporting a major story provide to your readers who allegedly get their news from the Weakly?
I can't wait to see the answer to this one.

Okay, I posted that on Sunday and we haven't seen an answer from Ragnar or anyone else from the Honolulu Weakly. (However, one of them was kind enough to give me a red chiclet.)
They were probably hard at work getting this week's issue put to bed, so that's certainly understandable and okay. But the new issue should be at the printer by now, so perhaps now we'll hear an answer to the question above, plus any comments about the new editor.

[RJC]

Re: Weakly Flogging Volume 2

Wow. That was quite an exchange. I have to confess, I had sort of forgotten it. A lost weekend, if you know what I mean.

In any case, it's always interesting to hear what people have to say about the paper. My instinct to defend my colleagues and writers sometimes gets the best of me, for which I apologize. It's obviously not appropriate for me to get drawn into a flame war about editorial decisions or policy or really anything else, and I will try to resist the urge toward PUI in the future.

I do think that while there are a lot of thoughtful posts here, some of the stuff that shows up is nothing more than mean-spirited bashing. In the time I have been browsing this site, there have been a number of stories in the Weekly that were excellent by any standard, and I have seen no mention of those. In fact, I'm not sure I've seen a single positive post made about the Weekly. Surely we're not THAT bad.

As I have posted before, I don't think the dailies are held to the same harsh standard that we are, but perhaps that's for the best, in a strange way. In any case, to each our own. We are grateful for the feedback, and hope people will continue to read the Weekly.

[jdub]

Re: Weakly Flogging Volume 2

Wow. My instinct to defend my colleagues and writers sometimes gets the best of me, for which I apologize.

apologize, my ass...stand strong, and don't take any guff from the swine...

[LikaNui]

Re: Weakly Flogging Volume 2

That was quite an exchange. I have to confess, I had sort of forgotten it.

Right. We believe that.

It's obviously not appropriate for me to get drawn into a flame war about editorial decisions or policy or really anything else, and I will try to resist the urge toward PUI in the future.

Nobody's flaming you. Matter of fact, a re-read through this thread and earlier Weakly threads shows more flames coming from the Weakly staff than at it.
(And what, by the way, does "PUI" mean?)
In any case, reading the earlier messages shows that most folks here toss the blame squarely in the lap of the publisher, not the staff. Many messages applaud the staff for doing as well as they are, given the circumstances. So please don't suddenly come up with a holier-than-thou comment about flames as a reason to avoid answering our questions.
I take it you have now learned that you were indeed wrong when you said the Weakly never ran stories about the SuperFerry before. And I also take it that you cannot answer the earlier questions: If that was true, how on earth does the Weakly justify not reporting on the Superferry for all these years??? Exactly what service would that gap in reporting a major story provide to your readers who allegedly get their news from the Weakly?
Your response today is just a way for you (or anyone on the staff) to avoid answering. Very weak cop-out.
And ya know, almost every other media outlet that outsources articles includes a few lines about the author. Except the Weakly. You folks use all these freelancers without giving us, the readers, a single clue as to their qualifications and background. Exactly how are we supposed to determine their veracity and objectivity?
For instance, let me try one more question relative to that same article: Why did the Weakly not tell your readers which of those anti-SuperFerry environmental groups your author Noah belongs to???
It's a little thing called "disclosure."

I do think that while there are a lot of thoughtful posts here, some of the stuff that shows up is nothing more than mean-spirited bashing.

The rest of us call it "media oversight." It helps keep the media -- ALL the media -- on the straight and narrow. Ya know, kind of a "Who's watching the watchers?" kind of deal.
But see, this all started with comments about the Weakly's "revolving door." The exceptionally high rate of staff turnover. (How long did the last Editor stay? Five weeks?) This is an island, and people talk, especially people whose friends have gotten burned. The Weakly keeps getting new staff who are all bright and bushy-tailed, until they get a gander of comments from former staffers. See http://web.archive.org/web/200211200...ords/HW10.html and also http://web.archive.org/web/200203130...rds/HW10b.html .

In the time I have been browsing this site, there have been a number of stories in the Weekly that were excellent by any standard, and I have seen no mention of those.

Oh, please. Now all of a sudden you want love, peace and happiness? Get a grip! The press itself is infamous for only (or mostly) reporting bad news. The Weakly is no exception. And in any case you're wrong -- there have indeed been complimentary posts here.

We are grateful for the feedback, and hope people will continue to read the Weekly.

And we hope you'll continue to answer the questions we ask, such as the unanswered ones above.
And yes, I did pick up today's copy. No mention of new editor Christopher Haire, and no listing of him on the masthead. (And no reply from you on the earlier question about that either, by the way.)
But funny thing. In the classified ads of today's issue there's a display ad looking for a News Editor for the Weakly. That job currently belongs to, um... oh yeah. YOU.

[WeeklyNews]

Re: Weakly Flogging Volume 2

To clarify: The new editor, Chris Haire, was not on the Nov. 23 masthead because he hadn't yet worked on an issue. He only arrived in Honolulu a few days ago—his name is there now. We only add people to the masthead when they work on the respective issue. The same goes for removing names from the masthead.

[LikaNui]

Re: Weakly Flogging Volume 2

To clarify: The new editor, Chris Haire, was not on the Nov. 23 masthead because he hadn't yet worked on an issue.

Yes, we were all perfectly aware of that, and that wasn't the question. Most publications would have run an item saying that they've hired a new person and giving their background and the date they'll start being involved.
You did have a small box yesterday announcing it. That was nice. It does beg a question, though, that perhaps you can answer. How old is Chris? I'm curious, because he sure has had a lot of jobs in a lot of different cities. According to your own info, he "was a reporter, columnist and critic for Boston's Weekly Dig, a regular contributor to the Charleston City Paper, Orlando Weekly, and Philadelphia Weekly, and editor for South Carolina's Metrobeat." Boston, Charleston, Orlando, Philadelphia, and South Carolina. That's a lot of moving around and a lot of packing and unpacking. If Chris is an older gentleman, then it makes more sense. If he's fairly young, then it begs some other obvious questions.
And while it's obvious that nobody on your staff is willing to answer my earlier questions from prior posts in this thread, I'm still wondering what's happening with Ragnar Carlson's current position as News Editor, since the paper is advertising for someone to fill that spot. Any comment?
And heck, let's throw in one more question that I believe has never been answered: is Ragnar Carlson any relation to publisher Laurie Carlson?
And hey, while I'm at it: who wrote that unsigned article in yesterday's issue that flagrantly flames the Advertiser and accuses them of illegal and unethical conduct regarding UH and the UARC?
You (the Weakly) claim that the Advertiser is covering things up by not disclosing that they publish six small little military newspapers here. And you pontificate that (gasp!) they sell ads in them and so the Advertiser is secretly in bed with the military and isn't reporting things that make the military look bad.
That's pretty weak and pretty lame.

I wonder if the Weakly accused the Star-Bulletin of that when they had the contract for those same six papers.

[Leo Lakio]

Re: Weakly Flogging Volume 2

(And what, by the way, does "PUI" mean?)

My guess is "Posting Under the Influence" - of what? Could have been simply anger, or could have been more; I would guess the latter, since the post also included reference to a "lost weekend." Perhaps that person (or their employer) needs to seek the assistance of a substance-abuse or alcoholism rehab clinic?

Keep the questions going, LikaNui. For the media to earn respect, they must be as transparent as they expect the subjects they report on to be. I believe RJC has moved into the "stonewalling" phase now. When the folks at the Weekly begin to question your patriotism, you'll know you've really struck a nerve.

[pzarquon]

Re: Weakly Flogging Volume 2

And while it's obvious that nobody on your staff is willing to answer my earlier questions from prior posts in this thread, I'm still wondering what's happening with Ragnar Carlson's current position as News Editor, since the paper is advertising for someone to fill that spot. Any comment?

And heck, let's throw in one more question that I believe has never been answered: is Ragnar Carlson any relation to publisher Laurie Carlson?

Hmm. Watch this space. [via Poinography]