Announcement

**pzarquon** · July 18, 2006, 06:56 AM

Re: Big fat self-valentine for the Advertiser

I don't work for either paper, and have friends working at both. I read both, and like both, but definitely love the Star-Bulletin.

The pro-Bulletin voices at HawaiiThreads dominate, and I used to think that was the unfortunate result of some kind of corporate policy limiting how much the Advertiser staff could interact with the public (be it message boards or blogs and the like). It seemed the only reader interaction the Advertiser supported was on its pages -- that is, in a venue it controlled. For better or worse, Bulletin staffers are definitely more directly engaged out there... and therefore naturally garner more understanding, since we're more likely to see them as people, not corporate automatons.

This kind of interaction has its downside, of course. Ask Ian Lind.

Now, though, we've actually heard from a few Advertiser folks directly. And while I'm glad to see they're not actually muzzled by corporate policy or anything, they're not exactly making the best impression. I liked it better when I thought they really wanted to say something, but couldn't.

We're equal opportunity media critics here. Like I said, the Star-Bulletin's own "commemorative edition" got analyzed, and we love finding goofs anywhere -- papers, TV, whatever. Hell, the poor Weekly gets picked apart reliably... yet obviously that means many folks are still picking it up.

The press gets pilloried in any community. I'd figure media professionals would know how to handle it, take it all in stride, have that distinct perverse sense of humor required in any newsroom. To merely say, "We don't bother with you people, anyway," is pretty ridiculous, since obviously you did bother enough to say so. And I wouldn't be so proud of not caring what readers think, either.

HawaiiThreads isn't exclusively populated by Star-Bulletin employees, after all. In fact, if the posters in the "Hawaii Media" section can be lumped together in any way, I'd say they're largely people who think more critically about the media than the average citizen. Many practitioners, and more than a few backseat editors. Not a more important voice, but certainly not one to dismiss out of hand, either.

And if you think a 2,000-square-foot "ad cake" plopped in the heart of City Hall is equivalent to posts on a web site, its obvious someone needs some help with perspective.

**Leo Lakio** · July 18, 2006, 07:06 AM

Re: Big fat self-valentine for the Advertiser

Originally posted by pzarquon

I'd figure media professionals would know how to handle it, take it all in stride, have that distinct perverse sense of humor required in any newsroom.

The "professionals" do.

**Middleman** · July 18, 2006, 07:43 AM

Re: Big fat self-valentine for the Advertiser

Sorry, Pzarqon, the way I see it, the S-B uses this board to do a lot of chest-pounding. (The Advertiser does its bragging in other forums and public displays, as we've learned in this 150th year.) Of course, S-B supporters here always preface comments with "I don't work for the paper . . . " or "I get both papers, but I really love the S-B . . . " or "I just don't have the time to wait for the Advertiser web site to load." Uh, sure. If that was the widespread perspective, the circulations would be closer.
And who says the Advertiser people aren't making the best impression? I think both sides come across as pretty self-absorbed.
The point is, the "real" public doesn't obsess over either paper, and probably most think the news they heard originated from television.
The only given is both dailies are way better than the Honolulu Weekly and less vain than the Pacific Business News.

**Leo Lakio** · July 18, 2006, 07:53 AM

Re: Big fat self-valentine for the Advertiser

I may have missed it in your other postings, but have you yet revealed your employer (or been outed by MadAzza?) As you once said:

Originally posted by Middleman

The day we leave our newsrooms...

**pzarquon** · July 18, 2006, 07:54 AM

Re: Big fat self-valentine for the Advertiser

Originally posted by Middleman

Uh, sure. If that was the widespread perspective, the circulations would be closer.

A fair point. But I think there's still more to the fact that, for whatever reason, there's affection for the Bulletin that the Advertiser doesn't engender. Sure, when it comes to delivering news product, the Advertiser -- and the Bulletin -- excel. And on that basis, you're right, most folks don't see much difference, and when it comes to putting their money where their mouth is (i.e. big circulation for PR drives and ad buys), most folks go with the Advertiser.

So maybe part of the Bulletin boosterism is the underdog thing, folks love that. Or maybe it's the Microsoft thing. You know, everyone loves to hate the corporate monolith, but just about everyone has still got the stuff on their desk.

Both papers have good people working for them. But one thing I'm saying above is that, I think we have a feel for the people at the Bulletin. For example, if anything at the Advertiser garners affection, its some of its talented columnists. Not surprisingly, these are also the people at the Advertiser who have a personal, distinctive voice. So I wish the Advertiser would come more out of its shell a bit in that regard. But not if Jeffrey Green is indicative of the overall tone over there.

The only given is both dailies are way better than the Honolulu Weekly and less vain than the Pacific Business News.

See? The public might not care (though I think more people than you think), but lots of us here certainly care. comparative and competitive comments are inevitable.

And frankly, comparing the Weekly to a metro daily is kind of ridiculous. Though even comparing our Weekly to the L.A. Weekly shows they've got a lot of room for improvement! I'm curious, though... how is PBN vain?

**Leo Lakio** · July 18, 2006, 08:34 AM

Re: Big fat self-valentine for the Advertiser

Originally posted by pzarquon

if anything at the Advertiser garners affection, its some of its talented columnists.

Just search these boards for references to Lee Cataluna for proof of that. I, for one, have to read Wayne Harada's writings. Wade Kilohana Shirkey is (was) another favorite.

But I still say the Adv. website takes too damn long to load, so I generally go to the S-B for most of my news from Hawai`i. If Mr. Green wants me to change my take on that, he can get them to work on the website issue (which, admittedly, he did say last month "Corporate" was working on.) Perhaps Middleman can assist him?

**Middleman** · July 18, 2006, 09:12 AM

Re: Big fat self-valentine for the Advertiser

The point is, of course the Advertiser's self-valentine is overdone and self-absorbed, but so are some of the postings by people affiliated with the papers on this forum. And I don't think the average reader gives a fig about the Advertiser's anniversary celebration or the Bulletin's underdog status. Free cake and games for the keiki? Hey, thanks Advertiser. More coupons? Thanks, Bulletin. When the quality of reporting is about equal, and it really is, all that matters is what each paper can do for me. That's why all of the sniping about cakes and underdogs is a waste of time.

**dick** · July 18, 2006, 09:13 AM

Re: Big fat self-valentine for the Advertiser

Originally posted by Middleman

Sorry, Pzarqon, the way I see it, the S-B uses this board to do a lot of chest-pounding.

That's a pretty silly commentary. You make it sound like we're required by our employers to go and post crap on this board.

I'm just some dude who happens to work at the Bulletin, but who also posts on HT. And am not afraid to let people know who I am.

**Leo Lakio** · July 18, 2006, 10:02 AM

Re: Big fat self-valentine for the Advertiser

There do seem to be several S-B employees posting to HT, and they are open about revealing their affilliation. If there are Adv & Weekly folks here, they are less vocal about naming their employers. The only ones I recall being open about it have been Mr. Green, Mr. Haire, and Mr. Carlson - who have all posted generally insulting comments about the quality of individuals who post to HT; not the best way to garner respect.

**Jeffrey Green** · July 18, 2006, 10:25 AM

Re: Big fat self-valentine for the Advertiser

My apologies to the forum if I came across as arrogant....not my intent.

Originally posted by Leo Lakio

The only ones I recall being open about it have been Mr. Green, Mr. Haire, and Mr. Carlson - who have all posted generally insulting comments about the quality of individuals who post to HT; not the best way to garner respect.

But, it does seem to me that there are a number of people on Hawaii Threads who can dish it out, but get very thin skinned when challenged. My occasional posts always generate a flurry of Gannett hate mail. It's interesting that you bemoan the lack of posts from Gannett and Honolulu Weekly employees, but violently attack any time we do post.

Pzarquon, thanks for your posts. While you don't always love us, you show more objectivity than most.

**Leo Lakio** · July 18, 2006, 10:42 AM

Re: Big fat self-valentine for the Advertiser