Page:Columbia Journalism Review volume 2 issue 1.djvu/41

 not getting enough circulation among union members. He quoted a taxi driver's explanation: "The Reporter's comics aren't as good as the other papers'."

Comics aside, a reader finds the tabloid lively and a little untidy, but enterprising in its coverage of local events. In trying to live up to its masthead principle ("The vision to see; the conscience to reason; the courage to speak"), the Reporter devotes much effort and space to articles on local governmental and social problems. Its disclosures resulted in the resignation and indictment of one county official (who died before coming to trial), and it helped expose questionable health-insurance businesses. The Reporter also likes to think its sniping helped another county official make up his mind not to seek re-election.

In its occasional forays into investigative reporting, the Reporter treads ground generally unexplored by the two other papers in recent years. The Oregonian, which once did an outstanding job of bringing bright light to dark corners, has seemed a bit shy ever since its Pulitzer Prize-winning exposures of seven years ago were dimmed by ineffective prosecution.

Over-all, the quality and scope of the Reporter's local coverage seems as good if not better than that of the Oregonian, while the latter supplies a more comprehensive picture of the world outside Portland. The Journal's greatest attractions are a gossipy local column and a sprightly sports section.

On a day of no special importance this year, the Reporter in 40 tabloid pages squeezed in 937 column inches (excluding headlines) of staff-originated material (including legislative news, pictures, and sports and women's pages). On the same day the Journal carried 1,108 inches of such matter in 28 standard pages and the Oregonian had 971 inches in 50 standard pages. The Oregonian outdistanced the other two in the quantity of its regional, national, and international report.

The Reporter's news-content shortcomings begin with an under-sized staff. Other deficiencies result from its occasionally overlooking the obvious and its failure to exercise enterprise and investigative techniques. An example of overlooking the obvious came in January when weather commanded the public's interest for nearly a week. On the first day of the area's worst snowstorm in years, the Reporter mentioned it only in five paragraphs on the back page. Like other papers, it sometimes has difficulty recognizing a story until it sees it in the opposition's pages.

Meager space is given national and international affairs, but this situation can be expected to improve if the paper's size increases. Another criticism: Sports, features, and women's news at times get disproportionate space at the expense of general news.

A cadre of veterans from the pre-strike newsrooms of the Oregonian and Journal forms the nucleus of the Reporter's small staff. From time to time the paper loses one of its old hands when personal financial problems prove too severe for subsistence-level pay. (The publisher works for the $79 a week that others on union benefits receive.) But the paper has attracted a number of young newsmen who are willing to work at a sacrifice, and a number of oldtimers who no longer have growing families.

The Reporter is directed by veteran Portlanders. Webb was on the Oregonian for twenty-four years. The editor, Llewellyn M. Gardiner, who attended Portland's Reed College with Webb, worked at the Oregonian for sixteen years. Lynn Wykoff, the Reporter's managing editor, was an Oregonian staffer for twenty-four years. The Reporter reached outside the union family for its advertising director and circulation manager, who are former executives in those departments on the other two papers. The Reporter's city editor was previously the Journal's night editor.

The other papers have had to replace these men—and others. The strike has hit hardest the Oregonian, in pre-strike years one of the best newspapers in Spring, 196339