Page One: Inside the New York Times

When I was in India, my access to news was always through a national newspaper, “The Times of India.” Even though in the ‘80s and ‘90s, when TV was becoming popular in India, the expensive cable subscription meant people would still fall back to newspapers for news about their local community and nation. The newspaper subscription was very cheap, and the national newspapers like “The Times of India,” “The Hindustan Times,” and “The Hindu” had record subscribers in the metros. With a diverse landscape, India, at that time, had a huge pool of local and regional newspapers. But then like any other new trend, cable TV started gaining momentum in the late ‘90s, with lower subscription fees. People started spending more time in front of their TVs. In addition, TV also opened a new outlet for advertising. With people cancelling their subscriptions and advertising revenues shifting new avenues, newspapers were left struggling everywhere around the country, trying to fully grapple the changing business landscape. While this story doesn’t fully represent the reasons for ailing newspapers in the U.S., it does, however, highlight an important element in the downturn of newspapers: the newspaper business is vulnerable to people’s changing behavior. This issue is the centerpiece of a new documentary on the “New York Times” called “Page One: Inside the New York Times.”

For the last decade or so, I haven’t subscribed to cable TV or to any local channels. For me, cable TV serves no purpose; I hardly go on-line for news. Instead, I believe to read news, one should have a newspaper subscription, which is the true source for daily news.  Even now, I am so obsessed with newspapers that I currently subscribe to the Sunday edition of “The New York Times,” “Financial Times,” “The Wall Street Journal,” the weekly newspaper, “Barrons,” and the magazine subscriptions for “The New Yorker” and “Time.” My friends call me a news junkie, and rightly so. I like the model of delivering news on paper; page one highlighting top news; and then specific sections for technology, business, and arts. It’s been a flawless model up until now, driven primarily by advertising revenues, but recently, it has had problems. The infusion of social networks, smartphones, tablets, and blogs has made the traditional newspaper model overly dynamic and unpredictable. Further, this slump is not helped by the 2008 financial crisis that paved way for frugal spending. And all of this has impacted the newspaper business in a big way.

At the start of the documentary, we told about the fate of a Denver local newspaper, the “Rocky Mountain News,” which published its final edition on February 27, 2009.  We also learn times are tough at two other newspaper companies, the “San Francisco Chronicle” and the “Boston Globe.” Currently, the daily circulation has plummeted to the lowest levels since the dot-com era. So, what has caused this slump? A media reporter at the “NY Times,” Richard Perez-Pena explains the dip in the advertising revenue, which has dropped by almost 30% in the last few years. He explains that the main driver of profits for newspapers is advertising revenue. It’s true that newspapers hardly break even on subscriptions alone.

To add to newspapers’ woes, the 2008 crisis caused the advertising revenues to shift from newspapers to other cheap outlets such as social networks, search engines, and news blogs. Furthermore, people started flocking to Web sites for news, and in the process, abandoned the flagship newspapers.  In an environment where news is easily accessible, today’s sophisticated readers have found easy and cheap ways to access news. Nonetheless, this transformation is dramatic, causing media companies to search for innovative ways to produce and dispense news. A media reporter, Brian Stelter, talks about his job at the “Times.” He discusses the role of social sites like Facebook and Twitter, where people post news links from other news sites. It is important for him to stay on top of these sites and feed the sites with links from the “Times.” It was evident that the readers have spoken how they want the news to be delivered, and it was time for news companies to listen to them. 

We gather the “Times” has been traditionally slow in adapting to the new market needs; in 2009, they were at the brink of bankruptcy, but they weathered the storm with ups and downs. The “Times” faces stiff competition from on-line news outlets like “The Huffington Post” and “Gawker.” But the real question is about the authenticity of news. On-line sites might be drawing people in hoards, but do they have the necessary resources to report from a battlefront? Who has the capability to back it up with facts? In one scene, Stelter questions the legitimacy of a video footage from an Iraqi battlefield. The founder of Wikipedia, Jimmy Wales, feels newspapers offer something different, and the popular blog sites only provide commentary on current issues.

The “Times” has been at the center of fierce backlash in the past. Their reporting on weapons of mass destruction in Iraq drew criticism, as WMD were among the main reasons U.S. troops were in Iraq. There were errors in reporting the story on Saddam Hussein possessing weapons of mass destruction. As one journalist rightly points out, your news is only as good as the source. In 2002, a hardcore right-wing commentator, Ann Coulter, famously remarked: “My only regret with Bush is he did not go to the “New York Times” building.” The owner of News Corp, Rupert Murdoch has channeled his resources by infusing money to bring down the “Times.” More recently, some people called the paper unpatriotic after they started publishing “cables” from the WikiLeaks. As such, this opens-up an interesting debate on activism vs. journalism.

Julian Assange is an activist-journalist whose main agenda is to expose governments, corporations, and their secrets. Assange is not interested in massaging a story, but, instead, he publishes documents that he receives from inside sources, which are popularly known as “cables” on the WikiLeaks site. It’s up to news agencies to comment on the cables and bring them to the public’s awareness. There is no doubt that the WikiLeaks site has become a hub for transmitting unaltered documents on covert government operations. To make news accessible to more readers, Assange contacted the “Times” to publish the cables, and the “Times” decided to cover the story, thereby exposing government secrets and making a lot of politicians unhappy. Is the “NY Times” being unpatriotic? A few politicians called for a judicial inquiry into the “Times” on charges of treason against the U.S. Like any other news reporting company, the “Times” was merely trying to cover a story. As citizens, people should know what governments are doing behind closed doors. If newspapers suddenly decide to weigh the consequences of every story they cover, then we would have never had the Watergate scandal exposed during the Nixon era and covered by the Washington Post. Indeed, the job of journalists is dangerous when they cover real, groundbreaking stories.

But the real star of the show is a media and cultural columnist at the “Times,” David Carr. We learn about his cocaine addiction and his struggles before joining the “Times.” Through the interviews, it is obvious Carr has a shrewd and candid personality, and there is some meanness in his behavior, which probably reflects how journalists have to defend their work all the time. He is a staunch supporter of the “Times’s” management in guiding the newspaper through tough economic times. Carr wrote a story on the “Tribune” bankruptcy, the biggest in newspaper history, against the wishes of the “Tribune” owner, Sam Zell, exposing Zell’s incompetency in leading a news agency.

The film also raises a valid question on the relationship between media and technology. Mostly, technology dictates how the news is presented to the readers. In a rapid-changing technology landscape, newspapers have to be quick to adapt or they lose readership. The arrival of Apple’s iPad presented a new opportunity for the “Times” to charge for the on-line subscription that was free earlier. Of course, the iPad injected a new revenues stream, and coupled with the on-line site and the iPad “NY Times” app, readership increased for the “Times.” The founder of Newser, Michael Wolff rightly says, “Media is a technology business.”

Overall, Rossi’s “Page One” consists of thought-provoking segments providing insights into the world of one of the oldest newspapers in the U.S., “The New York Times.” The film tackles valid issues at the “Times,” evaluates the fate of print newspapers, and explores the changing business landscape for media companies. The interviews shown here appear disjointed at times, and sometimes it becomes difficult to add up the pieces. There are many challenges for newspapers, but we never see solutions or recommendations from filmmakers, and instead the narrative utilizes interviews to ponder the current state of news. 

Video:

Magnolia presents “Page One” in its original theatrical aspect ratio of 1.78:1, encoded utilizing an AVC codec. The film is shot primarily in brightly lit interiors. The 1080p transfer is bright and vibrant, with remarkable detail and sharpness. The close-ups are good looking, and the flesh tones are warm, never appearing washed out, even in bright conditions. The filmmakers have shot the film using handheld cameras, but the camera movements are fairly stable. Often, scenes are soft, probably attributed to rapid camera movements. This is a minor concern, and the transfer looks perfectly fine.

Audio:

Magnolia has included a 5.1 DTS-HD Master Audio track. Being a dialogue-driven film, the dialogue is fairly crisp and audible. The front channels remain active throughout. The surround channels are mainly quite, but are activated occasionally. Also, the film can be viewed with English and Spanish subtitles.

Extras:

Magnolia has included a number of extras for this release, but they are mostly short interviews.

First, we get an interview with the former “Washington Post” reporter Carl Bernstein, who talks about the influence of Web on traditional news outlets, and the reporting by media companies. He believes it is necessary to save news reporting companies like the “New York Times.” Next, Emily Bell, a Professor of Journalism, discusses how to find the right audience and where one can find news on-line. Following this, Sarah Ellison-- a former “Wall Street Journal” reporter-- talks about Murdoch’s effort to destabilize the “NY Times.” She provides insights on the challenges faced by Murdoch, as he is rejected by the Elites in the U.K. She discusses the concept of family ownership that been the foundation for newspapers like the “New York Times” and the “Wall Street Journal.”

There are five additional scenes. Following this, a brief segment shows reactions of several journalists after seeing the film. A few talk about the David Carr’s front-page story on the “Tribune’s” debacle. One critic found different stories in the documentary very interesting and it provides for a seamless experience. Next, there is a mini-feature: Tim Arango with Joao Silva in Iraq. Finally, there is a Q & A session in which filmmakers discuss the role of interviewees like David Carr, Brian Stelter, and Bruce Headlam for the documentary. The group also discusses how the “Times” is changing with new media.

Parting Thoughts:

Rossi’s “Page One” makes astute observations on technology, journalism, news coverage, online blogs, and print newspapers. Surely, these are challenging times for newspapers to stay float, amid changing people’s behavior and declining print subscriptions and ad revenues. It’s a stimulating piece, featuring good information about the newspaper business. But whether the print subscription eventually dies is something that remains to be seen.