Some of you are reading that title and probably thinking that’s a little offensive on my part.
Isn’t that a little unkosher, though? I mean, in capitalism, it’s all up to the people making the product to figure out what the customer wants and the customer just buys it, right?
Not necessarily. Good businesses do listen to their customers, but also know that they have to make sure their customers are willing to make such statements at times other than when they’re annoyed. It’s easy to get people to talk about stuff that ticks them off, but a lot tougher to get feedback from the more lukewarm about a product. And it’s the lukewarm people that can probably help the newspaper business best, not the loudmouths.
And newspapers are a private business, but a unique private business in that our job isn’t always about making the customers happy. You should be readying things that make you happy, sad, hopeful, frustrated, motivated, or even angry. It’s not a pretty world out there, and we should be showing you the world as it is, not the world that will make you feel good.
So, here’s what you can do:
Let us experiement, and screw up: Seriously. Falling flat on our faces a few times can be a good thing. When an industry is in upheaval (which, because the ad revenue from print didn’t jump over to online, the newspaper industry is) the best thing we can be doing right now is trying some absolutely wacky stuff, stuff that would have even been unheard of in newspapers even five years ago. Who ever thought having a newspaper guy, for example, freeze his hands solid during a Marysville-Lindhurst section title game to type out what was happening in real time would be a hit? Since when would an in-depth look at a ballot measure include an accompanying 10-minute Q&A online video? We’ve done both, and more, in the past 18 months.
Yet many in newsrooms are afraid of such experimentation, because we’re afraid that if we try something, and it doesn’t work, readers are going to jump down our throats. Newspaper readers are, in case you didn’t know, notorious for being change-resistant. Good example: I just looked at an Appeal-Democrat from 1939, and there was “Blondie.” We still run Prince Valiant on Sundays, for crying out loud. Prince Freakin’ Valiant. So, be open to us trying something different and a little screwy by your standards, and don’t get the scream meter cranked up right away if it doesn’t work. Eventually, we might strike journalism oil.
Use the quick feedback tools: Comment on stories (civilly). Hit “recommends” on the stories you like. E-mail stories you like to friends. E-mail the reporters (civilly). Submit story tips online. There’s a lot of stuff out there for you to use. Use it.
Don’t assume we know it already: I sometimes get this conception that people believe reporters have crystal balls on their desks, right next to the telephone and the flask. Well, it’s not true. The crystal ball is in the repair shop, and we have to hide the flasks in our desks now.
But seriously, journalists don’t get as much special access and privileges as people might think. Most special rights for journalists these days come not before a story, but after in the form of shield laws. So, if you have an idea, feel free to let us know. Even if we already know about it, most of us will still give thanks and appreciation for being willing to call and make sure we knew. And, if we didn’t know, then you’ve gotten to live out that Deep Throat dream you’ve always had. Yeah, you know you’ve had it. 
Those are the three main things I think of. You can take part in idea #2 by commenting with your thoughts and extra suggestions.
