More thoughts on newspaper management

May 13th, 2008 Comments

This post is adapted from a comment I left responding to a comment by Andy Dickinson on my last post:

First, I didn’t say that there aren’t talented old, white guys. The world is filled with them. I’m arguing that at least some management should not fit into that demographic.

To be sure, the core demographic for newspapers is older, white men. Newspapers would be foolish to abandon this demographic, but newspapers also need to expand outside of that demographic. Logically, it makes sense to have decisions makers outside of that demographic.

Rob Curley was a Vice President at The Washington Post at age 35, and a manager many years prior to that at other papers. Most newspaper management are overwhelming in the 40-70 crowd. The Post, especially WPNI, is a great example of having younger people making decisions. They have a lot of people making decisions with digital products who are actually big consumers of digital products.

When I say young, I don’t really mean my age group. Although, I do think it makes sense to actively consult people in my age group on decisions that involve digital products (and it might make sense to have some in project management positions, like some newspapers do). That doesn’t happen at many newspapers. however.

I’ve been to a lot of smaller publications, and often the people in charge are older. Ironically, many of the larger publications include younger people in the decision making process. That should be noted.

The point is not that older people can’t be great managers, they can (many of the top CEOs in American are above 40, but these people know how to surround themselves with great talent, too). The point is that if they were really great managers they would include younger people in their discussions about products and initiatives largely aimed at younger people.

I think it’s no mistake, however, that most of the Web titans are younger. Brin and Page are 34 and 35, respectively, and they founded Google in their mid-20s. Zuckerberg is 23. Bezos founded Amazon.com at 30. The list could go on and on.

Even programmer-as-journalist pioneer Adrian Holovaty was only 26 when he received his $1.1 million grant from the Knight Foundation to start Everyblock. I’m willing to bet there are other Holovaty’s out there who were never given the chance to shine by their bosses. Holovaty got to innovate at the most-innovative journalism company around, the Lawrence Journal-World.

The Lawrence Journal-World and their online arm, Mediaphormedia, have a culture of innovation that is sorely lacking at most newspaper. It’s a culture more akin to a Web company than a newspaper company.

But many newspapers wouldn’t know what to do if they had a young Brin or Zuckerberg or even Holovaty working for them. They most likely wouldn’t allow either to be included in important Web decisions. That’s a catastrophic mistake.

Let’s say you have 10 top editors. At least one should be a digital native (or enthusiastic adopter). How many newspapers can honestly say that?

I’m not even arguing that the majority of management should be in the under-40 set (this will vary form publication to publication), but it makes sense to have some employees in their 20s and 30s making decisions. At the bare minimum, I would actively consult younger employees about Web products.

Maybe it’s not even about having younger people in management. Maybe it’s really just about consulting them on important Web decisions. And maybe it’s about allowing younger employees the opportunities to innovate and giving them the freedom necessary to build desirable Web products.

Is this too much to ask?

blog comments powered by Disqus

What's this?

You are currently reading More thoughts on newspaper management at Endemic.

meta