Jump to content

Sarnoff is leaving!

ricco67

By ricco67
in Houston and the Media

Recommended Posts

citykid09

citykid09

Posted
Posted
This is her last column as she's leaving for a firm. I wish her luck, but hopefully they can find someone that has her basic writing style.

it makes me sad, she was a cutie. :wub:

I was just going to post about this but you beat me to it. I hate to see her go. I looked foward to reading her article every week.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
TheNiche

TheNiche

Posted
Posted
Do they really need a reporter to process the press releases they receive from developers? ;-)

Having written a few myself, the answer is yes.

Developers and other for-profit organizations will never offer countervailing opinions for the purpose of stirring up debate...it takes a reporter to track down the anecdotal man-on-the-street or quasi-academically-sourced quotes and work them into otherwise dry news so as to create a juicy story that people want to read. Even Sarnoff was a little bit lax about doing this, but a good reporter will never fail to present both sides of an issue...even if it requires coming up with a B.S. counterargument, themselves. Of course, when I say "good reporter", I mean one that is valued by the news organization for being able to stir things up...not necessarily one that practices a rigorous set of ethical journalistic standards.

Aside from all that, how else is the Chronicle going to screw up every third fact, number, and quote without having lots of folks go through what's written in the press release? Don't you know that if they actually got their articles right, hell might freeze over?

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Trophy Property

Trophy Property

Posted
Posted

I for one am OK with her leaving. She botched a few articles about the firm I work for (don't ask, I am not telling). She mis-quoted our rep and put out false information. She has no respect from the people within my company. Good riddance.

I agree with Ricco67 She was sort of cute though.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Houston19514

Houston19514

Posted
Posted
Having written a few myself, the answer is yes.

Developers and other for-profit organizations will never offer countervailing opinions for the purpose of stirring up debate...it takes a reporter to track down the anecdotal man-on-the-street or quasi-academically-sourced quotes and work them into otherwise dry news so as to create a juicy story that people want to read. Even Sarnoff was a little bit lax about doing this, but a good reporter will never fail to present both sides of an issue...even if it requires coming up with a B.S. counterargument, themselves. Of course, when I say "good reporter", I mean one that is valued by the news organization for being able to stir things up...not necessarily one that practices a rigorous set of ethical journalistic standards.

Aside from all that, how else is the Chronicle going to screw up every third fact, number, and quote without having lots of folks go through what's written in the press release? Don't you know that if they actually got their articles right, hell might freeze over?

Sarnoff being "lax" about this (and before her, Ralphie being equally lax) was exactly my point. If they are not going to hire an actual "reporter" who gets out of the office and digs up information and does some fact-checking (and is at least familiar enough with the real estate development in this city to know some basic facts like... 2727 Kirby will NOT be the first high-rise condo in Houston and that Dallas is NOT ahead of Houston in high-rise living), then why go to the expense? Just put a secretary by the fax machine.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
TheNiche

TheNiche

Posted
Posted
Sarnoff being "lax" about this (and before her, Ralphie being equally lax) was exactly my point. If they are not going to hire an actual "reporter" who gets out of the office and digs up information and does some fact-checking (and is at least familiar enough with the real estate development in this city to know some basic facts like... 2727 Kirby will NOT be the first high-rise condo in Houston and that Dallas is NOT ahead of Houston in high-rise living), then why go to the expense? Just put a secretary by the fax machine.

But my point was that the Chronicle doesn't exist to disseminate information...it exists to sell advertisements. To sell ads, you must have a readership. To foster a readership, you must stir the pot...that's the purpose of a reporter. Facts are kind of secondary, but a good reporter will still get them right and manage to throw in enough semi-entertaining fluff.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Houston19514

Houston19514

Posted
Posted
But my point was that the Chronicle doesn't exist to disseminate information...it exists to sell advertisements. To sell ads, you must have a readership. To foster a readership, you must stir the pot...that's the purpose of a reporter. Facts are kind of secondary, but a good reporter will still get them right and manage to throw in enough semi-entertaining fluff.

The purpose of a reporter is to "stir the pot"?!? That's the kind of thinking that is leading to the demise of the newspaper industry. If facts are secondary, newspapers will be less than "secondary", they will be worthless. Sorry, but for a successful news organization, the purpose of a reporter is to gather and disseminate the information. There is plenty of content in the daily paper that is there solely to entertain. I really don't think anyone goes to the real estate section for entertaining "fluff".

Link to comment
Share on other sites
TheNiche

TheNiche

Posted
Posted
The purpose of a reporter is to "stir the pot"?!? That's the kind of thinking that is leading to the demise of the newspaper industry. If facts are secondary, newspapers will be less than "secondary", they will be worthless. Sorry, but for a successful news organization, the purpose of a reporter is to gather and disseminate the information. There is plenty of content in the daily paper that is there solely to entertain.

The stirring motion is the only thing propping up the newspaper industry. What we have here is a classic elitist vs. populist debate...the latter usually wins out where publications with large distributions are concerned as a result of financial pressures. Elitists then tend more toward smaller demassified niche media.

CNN, for example, poses as a news organization, but is really much more about entertainment. Otherwise, they wouldn't have trash shows like Nancy Grace, Lou Dobbs, or Glen Beck.

I really don't think anyone goes to the real estate section for entertaining "fluff".

If the Chronicle ever got itself a really good reporter, you bet that people would. Remember how Nancy wrote some crap about Bob Yari, some local guy in the industry that happened to be a producer of some movie? That's what you'd get with a good reporter at the Chronicle.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Houston19514

Houston19514

Posted
Posted
The stirring motion is the only thing propping up the newspaper industry. What we have here is a classic elitist vs. populist debate...the latter usually wins out where publications with large distributions are concerned as a result of financial pressures. Elitists then tend more toward smaller demassified niche media.

CNN, for example, poses as a news organization, but is really much more about entertainment. Otherwise, they wouldn't have trash shows like Nancy Grace, Lou Dobbs, or Glen Beck.

If the Chronicle ever got itself a really good reporter, you bet that people would. Remember how Nancy wrote some crap about Bob Yari, some local guy in the industry that happened to be a producer of some movie? That's what you'd get with a good reporter at the Chronicle.

<YAWN> No, I don't remember her story about some movie producer. If I wanted to read about movie producers (and I'm thinking I'm not alone in this), I'd turn to the entertainment section of the paper.

A good real estate reporter writes about real estate. A good real estate reporter would have had something in the paper about the proposed Shamrock Tower BEFORE the sales trailer went on the property, not months afterward. A good real estate reporter would have had something in the paper by now about the Shamrock Tower being (presumably) dead. A good real estate reporter would have an occasional scoop on, oh, maybe the leasing activity at Houston Pavilions, or Boulevard Place, or City Centre, or the planning and development of the downtown park. A good real estate reporter would have had SOMEthing in the paper about the apparent demise of the Renaissance Hotel project in the old Texaco Building. We don't need fluff. We don't need "human interest" stories about some guy who happens to be a producer of some movie; we need information about real estate development and activity. As I said before, if they aren't going to get someone who can learn about, dig for, and report on real estate activities around the metro area, they are wasting their time and money. If they want another "fluff" reporter, they should be honest about it and just add another staffer to the entertainment section.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
RedScare

RedScare

Posted
Posted
The stirring motion is the only thing propping up the newspaper industry. What we have here is a classic elitist vs. populist debate...the latter usually wins out where publications with large distributions are concerned as a result of financial pressures. Elitists then tend more toward smaller demassified niche media.

Oh, F-ing brother! Do you ever read the drivel that oozes out of your keyboard? You are so full of it. You try to use big words and wordy prose to make everyone think you know what you are talking about...and, you are just so full of it. That last post is a classic example of totally made up BS. :wacko:

But, don't stop, though. I find your made up theories very entertaining, especially when made in response to my drivel, much better than a 2 word response. :lol:

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Subdude

Subdude

Posted
Posted

I don't think the point is that Sarnoff was necessarily a bad reporter. I think that the issue is that the Chronicle doesn't really care about having the kind of in-depth stories that Houston19514 describes (and all of us here would love to see). It is the same thing with architecture reporting, as I've said a billion times or so. The Chronicle doesn't really care about it. Critical reporting would require them to make judgements, and offend some readers, and they would prefer not to. That is their call. To theNiche's point, they are an advertising delivery system, and they probably don't believe the investment in stronger reporting, opinion, or critical stories would pay off in revenue.

This isn't specific to the Chronicle, either. They are very much equivalent to the lead newspapers in most US cities. It is like some kind of Gresham's Law for reporting. Bad money drives out the good, and fluff news drives out the substantive. Just check out the revised Yahoo home page to see it in action.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
sevfiv

sevfiv

Posted
Posted
It is like some kind of Gresham's Law for reporting. Bad money drives out the good, and fluff news drives out the substantive. Just check out the revised Yahoo home page to see it in action.

Try the all-new Yahoo! home page: fresh, fun and made for you *gag*

re: gresham - never thought about it like that, but so true :unsure:

Link to comment
Share on other sites
nmainguy

nmainguy

Posted
Posted
But my point was that the Chronicle doesn't exist to disseminate information...it exists to sell advertisements. To sell ads, you must have a readership. To foster a readership, you must stir the pot...that's the purpose of a reporter. Facts are kind of secondary, but a good reporter will still get them right and manage to throw in enough semi-entertaining fluff.

Fluff? In the real estate section? Where the hell did that come from?

A true real estate column would be one that analyzes housing market trends and demographics.

It would report on the failures of big, publicly promoted but never built developments and really DIG to get the back-story.

It would reveal-in depth-the mechinations behind funding and contract letting on our new sports stadiums.

In other words: A real reporter.

This Sarnoff never was.

FLUFF??? :wacko:

Just check out the revised Yahoo home page to see it in action.

I've never used Yahoo much and now I remember why. The most prominent feature is a big picture of a $100 dollar hamburger. :blink:

Thanks for the heads-up, Sub.

B)

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Subdude

Subdude

Posted
Posted
Proof that the Chron is junk?

Their "Blogs" have greater visibility online than their "Editorials".

And they actually call their editorials "opinion".

Leave it to the Chron to throw tradition to the wind.

Well, in all fairness to the Chron, a lot of editorial content - or lack of the same - is going to be decided by its parent company Hearst. They're just a local branch of a national operation. Those old-fashioned newspaper traditions were thrown to the wind long ago. Remember, they don't want their "editorials" to really express any particular opinion. It's not an accident.

I've never used Yahoo much and now I remember why. The most prominent feature is a big picture of a $100 dollar hamburger. :blink:

Thanks for the heads-up, Sub.

B)

Hey, the content has picked up then. Most days their lead feature involves Lindsay or Britney.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
firstngoal

firstngoal

Posted
Posted
I don't think the point is that Sarnoff was necessarily a bad reporter. I think that the issue is that the Chronicle doesn't really care about having the kind of in-depth stories that Houston19514 describes (and all of us here would love to see). It is the same thing with architecture reporting, as I've said a billion times or so. The Chronicle doesn't really care about it. Critical reporting would require them to make judgements, and offend some readers, and they would prefer not to. That is their call. To theNiche's point, they are an advertising delivery system, and they probably don't believe the investment in stronger reporting, opinion, or critical stories would pay off in revenue.

This isn't specific to the Chronicle, either. They are very much equivalent to the lead newspapers in most US cities. It is like some kind of Gresham's Law for reporting. Bad money drives out the good, and fluff news drives out the substantive. Just check out the revised Yahoo home page to see it in action.

Bingo!!! I can't believe the way people are ripping on Sarnoff here. Ease up folks! I'm not sure if any of you recall, but prior to her tenure at the Chronicle, Sarnoff was doing solid work at the Houston Business Journal. I don't remember anyone complaining then...

The reason for the lack of quality real estate reporting (or local architecture commentary - which is non-existent) lies completely with the Houston Chronicle... and specifically Jeff Cohen. When he came to the Chronicle a few years ago, he made a concerted effort to make the paper "prettier", crank up advertising sales, and dumb it down to the lowest common denominator. Instead of deep, probing articles that enlighten people, articles (no matter the section) are geared for a 5th grader to comprehend. It is truly pathetic... and an embarrassment for America's 4th largest city.

People should realize that what any reporter writes is very heavily edited... especially at the Chronicle. Sarnoff wasn't there very long... perhaps that should tell people that maybe, just maybe, she shared some of the same frustrations that people are expressing here. Compare her work at the HBJ with her work at the Chronicle... the difference is clear. Same reporter... different environment.

Lastly, this forum should be really upset at the Chronicle for another reason. What they have done to the pedestrian environment along Texas Avenue downtown is criminal. Their scaffolding surrounding the building has obstructed the sidewalks - and marred the landscape on a key area of the CBD - for years now! It is unbelievable... repair your problematic facade already!!! I'd love to see the city get after the Chronicle... or how about the Downtown Management District????? <_<

Link to comment
Share on other sites
TheNiche

TheNiche

Posted
Posted
Oh, F-ing brother! Do you ever read the drivel that oozes out of your keyboard? You are so full of it. You try to use big words and wordy prose to make everyone think you know what you are talking about...and, you are just so full of it. That last post is a classic example of totally made up BS. :wacko:

But, don't stop, though. I find your made up theories very entertaining, especially when made in response to my drivel, much better than a 2 word response. :lol:

I took an entire class at UH a couple years back that revolved around the populist vs. elitist issue as it pertains to various forms of media. If you'd like definitions of my "big words", please feel free to ask (or PM if you're feeling too embarassed). If my "wordy prose" is too much for you, I can also clarify that. Anything to assist in your comprehension of my point.

Of course, I do expect reciprocation...for instance, in the form of a counterargument more intellectually advanced than "You are so full of it." <_<

It would report on the failures of big, publicly promoted but never built developments and really DIG to get the back-story.

Nancy was one of the few big real estate journalists in town...and in a position like hers, she did not have the option of burning bridges by writing stories with negative information about various developers. Doing so would have had two impacts: 1) alienate those that are reported on so that they will never talk to her about their projects again, and 2) provide a disincentive for other developers to bring their plans to her because there's a risk that she might slam them at some point in the future if the project fails. Reputation is everything when you're trying to push through a risky venture...don't underestimate its value (or liability).

So, you see, you'll never hear a negative thing from her mouth because she's got to protect her relatively few sources...her livelihood as a niche reporter.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
nmainguy

nmainguy

Posted
Posted
Nancy was one of the few big real estate journalists in town...and in a position like hers, she did not have the option of burning bridges by writing stories with negative information about various developers. Doing so would have had two impacts: 1) alienate those that are reported on so that they will never talk to her about their projects again, and 2) provide a disincentive for other developers to bring their plans to her because there's a risk that she might slam them at some point in the future if the project fails. Reputation is everything when you're trying to push through a risky venture...don't underestimate its value (or liability).

So, you see, you'll never hear a negative thing from her mouth because she's got to protect her relatively few sources...her livelihood as a niche reporter.

Total BS-if you indeed think that is journalism. This is what she did: ripped her Sunday items from the fax machine.

So you see, she did just as you described. Never offended or alienated anyone but her readers.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
RedScare

RedScare

Posted
Posted

Sarnoff was no different than every real estate journalist in every city. They all are little more than free publicity for developers attempting to get buzz generated for their projects. To single her out for criticism is unfair. Every city I have lived in does the same thing. Even the Dallas Morning News, which blows away the Chronicle in its regular news reporting, becomes a naked civic booster when it comes to real estate or development news. It is the nature of the beast, whether we like it or not. It is left to us to separate the reality from the fantasy.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
MidtownCoog

MidtownCoog

Posted
Posted
It is unbelievable... repair your problematic facade already!!! I'd love to see the city get after the Chronicle... or how about the Downtown Management District?????

Wow. You are right about the scaffolding. That HAS been there forever.

Their parking garage is also a looker. Not.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
  • 1 year later...
lockmat

lockmat

Posted
Posted

When is Nancy's new story comin out? It seems like forever since the last one.

Plus, does anyone have some pics of her? I remember someone on here saying she's quite the catch. She looks pretty cute from her chron mug shot.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
lockmat

lockmat

Posted
Posted
I suppose if she counts each of the three parts as seperate articles. Otherwise, I must just be looking in the wrong part of the Chronicle's website or something.

"Almost all of my stories run in the Business section. I write the Sunday piece and an average of two more stories for the main section each week."

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

Go to topic listing
All of the HAIF
None of the ads!
HAIF+
Just
$5!


×
×
  • Create New...