TEMPLE: Why Denver can't support two papers

By John Temple, Rocky Mountain News (Contact)

Published February 27, 2009 at 12:05 a.m.

Text size

More Local News

Comments

February 27, 2009

1:44 a.m.

Suggest removal

JonCaldara writes:

The loss of the Rocky may well be the greatest loss this city has ever experienced. Government will be free of a powerful, watchful eye and the community will be without a partner. We will never forget the Rocky Mountain News.
February 27, 2009

5:51 a.m.

Suggest removal

Oh_Wise_One writes:

"an unwieldy bureaucratic structure not suited to success" is exactly the federal government that Obama is giving us.

Goodbye Rocky, my best to your {former} employees.
February 27, 2009

6:33 a.m.

Suggest removal

Lurkers6a writes:

Wow, that was truely shameful. What Scripps newspaper do you go to next?
February 27, 2009

6:41 a.m.

Suggest removal

V_twinMan writes:

Mr. Temple,
Thank you for your thoughtful words and insights throughout the years, your words from the editor's point of view will be missed greatly.

V- Twin man
February 27, 2009

6:53 a.m.

Suggest removal

ktlmn writes:

You wonder why so many traditional newspapers are going out of business? The headline said, "OJ gets 30 years". That's not true. He got a max of 30 years and will almost assuredly get out in less than 12. Honost, thorough reporting by all the media is absent. People have to turn to alternative media and sift through lies to find out what is actually going on. You have all done this to yourselves. I fully expect the post to shortly go out of business too.
February 27, 2009

7:10 a.m.

Suggest removal

Bmac writes:

Should have kept the Rocky Mountain News rather than the Denver Post. Does anybody read the post other than for the classifieds?
February 27, 2009

7:20 a.m.

Suggest removal

carlTran writes:

I don't know, John... it looks like a lot of people blame you: http://www.whokilledtherocky.com.
February 27, 2009

7:24 a.m.

Suggest removal

INC writes:

I find it interesting as to how the decision to allow the Rocky to exist in an on line format... is up to the post?

yet it seems every other line from the JOA bosses is "sad" and " not part of Denvers paper war". But that's exactly what it is. The final death knell for the Rocky comes at the hands of its rival... the post.

BLAH!!!
February 27, 2009

7:44 a.m.

Suggest removal

CharlesR writes:

Question: Will E W Scripps share in the profits of the Denver Post (the JOA)? When the St. Louis JOA was extinguished in the early 1980s, the Newhouse chain kept raking in profits from the Post-Dispatch for more than 20 years. In fact, I think Lee Enterprises finally had to buy out the Newhouse interest. In other words, the JOA may have damped down the competition, but did it also give Scripps (and Singleton) an incentive to kill one of the papers -- and throw all those people out of work?
February 27, 2009

8:06 a.m.

Suggest removal

cmcray1 writes:

I killed you. Oh dang. I NEVER buy a paper anymore. Mea Culpa and Adios.
February 27, 2009

8:13 a.m.

Suggest removal

DenverDem writes:

What is going to happen to the archives?
February 27, 2009

8:43 a.m.

Suggest removal

Craig writes:

This is a sad day for me. I grew up with the Rocky Mountain News, starting with reading the funny papers as a kid back in the 1950s. The Rocky formed my perception of what a newspaper should be.

Although its demise is a personal loss for me, it’s far more to the dedicated professionals on its payroll who are suddenly without jobs this morning. I wish them the best in finding new positions or careers elsewhere,
February 27, 2009

8:57 a.m.

Suggest removal

jr14335 writes:

Great! Now just get rid of the Broncos and the state will be in tip-top shape!
February 27, 2009

9:25 a.m.

Suggest removal

morpho writes:

You planted the seeds of your own destruction.
Watching the multimedia story about the closure is the kind of coverage that readers want for all stories. Depth, context, emotion....instead what the mass media gives us is generally shallow, and isolated and grey. In a world full of quick and dirty we yearn for something of substance.
The other HUGE mistake the news media has made is to even try to offer the news online.
If RMN, and BBC and CBS and CNN and the Post etc. didn't put the news online people would be forced to support news organizations and in turn democracy. People still want to read and hear about the news, but they will try and get it the easiest and cheapest way possible. Nobody has the news but the news media and you gave it away! (a nice idea but hard to keep the system funded that way)
Too bad for all of us in the end.
best of luck to you all.
February 27, 2009

9:51 a.m.

Suggest removal

anchovie34 writes:

I like the fact that he discusses the prices in comparable markets, then cites two markets which are much, much larger then Denver (Denver 2.5 million, Phoenix 5 million, Chicago 9 million). If you're going to talk about similar markets, at least pick some markets that are actually similar in size - like say Portland, San Diego or Cleveland.
February 27, 2009

10:11 a.m.

Suggest removal

LooseCannon writes:

Delivering the Rocky on my bicycle early in the morning was my first job. I loved the big canvas bags that hung on the handlebar. It seemed like a special benefit at the time to be able to read the news before anyone else. Sunday mornings, when the papers were much bigger than they were during the week, I threw the papers from the open back of a slow-moving station wagon. Sundays always ended with a stop at Dunkin' Donuts for donuts and coffee or milk. A few years later, when my name would occasionally appear in the sports section, my father would get up early to look for it and, finding it, cut out the story and take it to work to show it to his coworkers. Our family will miss the Rocky, but I have to be honest and say what we really miss is the Rocky that used to be. The paper had a different attitude years ago.
February 27, 2009

10:52 a.m.

Suggest removal

Bronte writes:

Probably the most outrageous failure of the papers was their refusing to report accurately on the “new” Denver airport.

In fact, the new DIA was a corrupt endeavor, with no need, and was “invented” so that a certain friend of Pena could enrich himself by untold millions. During the time of the phony “vote” (the vote itself was non-binding; the project would have continued even if the vote failed) the newspapers reported ZERO of the problems projected for the new airport and its impact on the city and the budget. It was billed as the “panacea” of all that ailed Denver and promised untold riches from the jobs furnished to the economy for coming decades. In truth, there were ZERO new jobs because airports are built by professional airport builders, who bring their own help from around the globe. And, we all know that the new DIA HURT the Denver economy, not helping it at all.

In fact, the new runways and concourses at Stapleton weren’t even paid for and the new runways were never put into operation. They were allowed to “abandon” the unpaid for concourses and runways in order to defraud the people of Denver into believing that an entire new airport (at a remote location) was necessary. Stapleton was a jewel, and was a huge money-maker; and, all over the country (and the world) there are convenient airports located safely in metro areas; the notion that it was “unsafe” came from Pena; he had to “trash” his own airport so he could built a new one (and they named a piece of road after this vulgarian).

There were hundreds of studies (with impeccable sources) that explained all of this in detail, furnished to the Rocky and the Post, but both refused to report on it! If one of them dared to “say anything” they would have been “locked out” by the
administration, so they were silent.

DID A SINGLE REPORTER WALK THE NEW CONCOURSES, OR EXAMINE THE NEW RUNWAYS THAT WERE NOT BEING USED AT STAPLETON? DID A SINGLE REPORTER ASK “WHY” THE NEWLY BUILT CONCOURSES AND RUNWAYS WERE BEING KEPT OUT OF USAGE? DID A SINGLE REPORTER ASK WHAT THE “DEMAND” FOR A NEW AIRPORT WOULD HAVE BEEN IF STAPLETON HAD PUT THE NEWLY BUILT FACILITIES INTO OPERATION? THE NEWLY BUILT CONCOURSES AND RUNWAYS HAD BEEN BUDGETED FOR, PRIOR TO THEIR CONSTRUCTION, AND THEN ABANDONED, JUST TO ALLOW PENA TO DEMAND A “NEW” AIRPORT; SO WHERE WERE THE REPORTERS WE BEGGED FOR “THE ROCKY” TO CHECK OUT, THAT WOULD JUST TAKE A FEW MINUTES TO SEE AND REPORT ON? THEY CURTAILED NEW RUNWAY USAGE TO MAKE STAPLETON LOOK ARTIFICIALLY BUSY YET THE “REPORTERS” AT “THE ROCKY” WERE “TOO BUSY” TO CHECK INTO THE LARGEST FARUD ECVERY PERPETRATED ON THE CITIZENS OF DENVER!!!

When the "free press" allows itself to become part of a corrupt endeavor, it has lost its right to exist. The "good old Rocky" refused to “do the job of a free press” so they DESERVE to lose their license to report. What else did they "ignore" that was corrupt and harmed the people in the region?
February 27, 2009

11:05 a.m.

Suggest removal

Bronte writes:

Sorry Jon Caldara, but the notion that the loss of the RMN means that "Government will be free of a powerful, watchful eye" is merely a hopeful homily of your imagination.

The RMN failed their largest duty, which is to INFORM the people of the region. The "bosses" were martini drinking buddies of some of the biggest scam artists to hit this area. And THAT is the truth. Yes, some small fish were sacrificed, but those were the folks who didn't have the power to fight back (or the inside track to keep the paper quiet).
February 27, 2009

11:09 a.m.

Suggest removal

anchovie34 writes:

Bronte, I didn't live in Denver before DIA, but I do know that DIA is the 5th busiest airport in the nation and 10th or 11th busiest in the world by passenger volume. All those passengers bring a lot of money into the city, even if they never leave the concourse. If the new airport tripled the passenger volume, then it would be logical to assume that it tripled the demand for airport employees to run the security screens, restaurants, ticket counters, etc. Sounds like it may have created many new jobs beyond the immediate construction of the airport, and it made Denver a major transit center for the country. Quick question: what is Atlanta's most successful endeavor? The airport. That city grew with the airport - not railroads, not coca-cola, not turner broadcasting. Also, ever spent an afternoon near O'Hare or LAX? It's terrible, and DIA is only a 25 minute drive from Downtown, not exactly the worst thing in the world.
February 27, 2009

11:21 a.m.

Suggest removal

JustSayin writes:

Time to retrench - time for a new local paper to rise from the back room of some Denver bar and be relevant in these times. It would need to be small - just Denver and the burb's for a start, without the tons and tons of entrenched overhead that crushed the RMNews and their corporate owners. That is, if there are enterprising souls who have the guts and foresight to start anew.

Wouldn't it be great if $cripp$ offered the archives and the name to the state of Colorado, and perhaps a small paper starting from scratch could someday earn the right to receive the name and mantle of the 'Rocky Mountain News'?
February 27, 2009

11:28 a.m.

Suggest removal

rcop writes:

To remain in denial of a major reason for decline in readership is another reason for the failure of the RMN.

People have been saying no in increasing numbers to the pre-digested left-biased pseudo-news that papers like the Rocky have been putting out. Hard dispassionate news reporting is dead as we used to know it.

Until and only when news outlets recognize this and return to their journalistic roots, there will be more failures like the RMN to count along with this head-in-the-sand denial by editors and reporters.
February 27, 2009

11:40 a.m.

Suggest removal

Bronte writes:

Loose Cannon (and Craig): I was stunned to hear of the end of the RMN and have mixed feelings. I was raised with both papers, after moving to Denver in 1955. The Rocky “woke us up” and was compact enough to be easily transportable. It went to work with us, especially on the bus. It seemed as though everyone had their nose stuck in the paper; it went on coffee breaks and lunch and was borrowed around the office. Rolled up, and under the arm, it was “a traveler” but could only be read by one person at a time, due to its tabloid style. Folks absolutely depended on the RMN to make sense of the activities of the day.

The Post was the “after dinner” paper and was the more “genteel” of the two. The Post was easily pulled apart into sections, so the whole family could read and trade. The Post was a “living room” paper; the Rocky was the kitchen and going to work paper. For decades I subscribed to both, as did most families I knew. The hours of enjoyment, education, knowledge imparted, and information gained, by those papers is impossible to calculate. My mother was a school teacher who started her day with the RMN and occasionally used items in the paper to reinforce a point in her classroom. Sometimes the Post, but more often the News since it was the morning paper in those days.

HOWEVER, as I grew up and became familiar with some of the more unsavory parts of the “news game” I began to lose my fervor. First, when there are two newspapers, the advertisers get a free ride because if any “truths” are reported that they do not like, they will move their advertising dollars to the other paper. That type of blackmail does not apply when there is only a single paper. Then there are the numbers of “attitudes” that are exhibited by reporters who sneer and side with those politicians on the Left and mock those on the Right. Yes, we know that they were all subjected to "liberalism" in j-school, but so were the rest of us! We expected reporters from a major paper to be able to sift through their professors' Leftist garbage and DO THE JOB they were hired to do!

All in all, IF the newspapers had just "done their job" and not succumbed to politics (even dirty politics) and trading favors and wanting to "run with the big dogs" rather than using their bully pulpit TO INFORM THE PEOPLE, we would all have been better off. The press is MEANT to be separate from the "powers that be" not to share their sports boxes, and not to "hang out" with them.

What the bosses at the Rocky failed to take into account was that we thought of it as OUR paper! However, that sense of partnership only went one way. They knew it was "their" paper so they were free to manipulate when a particular agenda required. Over time, the disregard for the community becomes pervasive and folks knew that much was being "held back" so they moved on to those sources that treats them less like mushrooms.
February 27, 2009

11:46 a.m.

Suggest removal

anchovie34 writes:

rcop - Viewpoints aside, the internet killed the newspaper. Along with free classified sites like craigslist, why would anyone pay for a newspaper subscription when you can get current news, free, online? I got a 3 month subscription to the DNA about 6 months ago, but only because some kid was selling them door-to-door for college money. When the subscription expired, I received numerous calls to continue delivery, but I didn't really want it to begin with. I never read the daily delivered paper because it was already old news that I read the day before online. They would have been better off dropping the paper directly into my recycling bin and just saved me the effort.
February 27, 2009

noon

Suggest removal

rcop writes:

I appreciate your viewpoint anchovie, but if an online subscription was all that print news media had to adapt to, there would not be this cascade of bankrupt media outlets since advertising is still a source of income to internet based websites. And online subscriptions could have been offered at a price.

It is more than the availability of the internet.
February 27, 2009

12:08 p.m.

Suggest removal

Landman08 writes:

Thank you Mr. Temple for this factual, honest and heartfelt summary. I respect you and your staff for not taking potshots as the newwpaper came to the end of the line. You could have done so and few would have complained. The Rocky's history will end with integrity and character - two traits that seem to be in short supply these days. Denver will miss the Rocky Mountain News.
February 27, 2009

12:12 p.m.

Suggest removal

anchovie34 writes:

You're right, it's more than the availability of the internet, but that is the primary factor. There are more news outlets, and most of them cost free, than there was 15 years ago. That hurts, a lot. Or do you think it's a coincidence? I'm 26, and I don't know a single person under 35 who gets the daily paper. Perhaps it's a generational thing (I have know idea how old you are), but when the readers start dying out and the new generations get information from alternative sources, it's pretty easy to figure out how we got here.
February 27, 2009

12:15 p.m.

Suggest removal

anchovie34 writes:

to follow-up my point, in order to survive, both Detroit area papers stopped home delivery except a few days a week, and now run only online. It's cost effective, and has a much broader readership (i.e. I live in Denver, but regularly read the Free Press and the Detroit News online). The writing was on the wall, print was no longer a profitable business model for those papers.
February 27, 2009

12:36 p.m.

Suggest removal

rcop writes:

Glad to hear that Detroit found a way to survive, but my point continues to be demonstrated in the majority of media outlet failures that share in common a lack of hard news reporting.

Take a look at the growing list.
February 27, 2009

12:36 p.m.

Suggest removal

sml11 writes:

In my humble opinion, Denver is losing the wrong paper - the Rocky was always better thaan the Post!
February 27, 2009

12:50 p.m.

Suggest removal

ktlmn writes:

I moved from Denver over 20 years ago but still visit family regularly. When did the Rocky Mountain News start getting called the Rocky? It was never called the Rocky when I lived there. It was called The News.
February 27, 2009

12:56 p.m.

Suggest removal

anchovie34 writes:

the majority of those media outlet failures that you are referring to all have one thing in common: they're all... Newspapers. It's not the news that's the problem, it's the method of distribution (paper vs. digital). One is much more cost effective than the other, therefore it is dominating the landscape. I mean, you're still reading the paper despite it's liberal leaning. Perhaps, that's because that is how you consume media. Now, though, a large number of people would never pick up a physical copy of the rocky because it's online, not because they dislike the news and reporting.
February 27, 2009

12:57 p.m.

Suggest removal

geezlouise writes:

You are much too gracious, John. Scripps is the villain. It could have saved you. It could have saved the Albuquerque Tribune. It chose not to because corporate greed and fluffy cable TV shows were more important to its cold little business heart than the greater good.
February 27, 2009

1:16 p.m.

Suggest removal

ktlmn writes:

These newspapers exist to make money, not for the "greater good." Newspapers like Pravda existed for the "greater good" 30 years ago. That turned out well.
February 27, 2009

1:46 p.m.

Suggest removal

LOUIE writes:

ANCHOVIE34, I sometime hit the Freepress under the moniker of DENVERLOUIE. They have a hell of a format and generate a multitude of comments that fly. I mentioned them several months ago here at the Rocky site, but no response. The Freepress is an excellent business model, but would it work here?
February 27, 2009

1:53 p.m.

Suggest removal

x_runner writes:

Bronte writes: "Yes, we know that they were all subjected to 'liberalism' in j-school, but so were the rest of us! We expected reporters from a major paper to be able to sift through their professors' Leftist garbage and DO THE JOB they were hired to do!"
Who is "we?" I don't know what j-school you attended (probably none, judging from your startlingly uninformed opinions), but the the professors at mine (San Diego State class of '88) were far more concerned with accuracy, fact-checking, grammar, balance, newsworthiness and the other essential tools of reporting, than they were with any sort of ideological inculcation.
Neocons never seem to tire of the "left-wing media" mantra, while they strive not for balanced reporting, but rather media that are fawning lapdogs for their own ideologies.
February 27, 2009

2:32 p.m.

Suggest removal

windbourne writes:

Denver could have EASILY supported 2 papers. The problem is that RMN's and DP's management are horrible. Basically, both of you look at a paper as a set of ads, and opinions. Sadly, you have forgotten that you are SUPPOSE TO REPORT THE NEWS.
The big issue is neither of you have adopted the companies to new conditions. The condition is the net with blogs (pressure on your news), as well as ads on the net(removes your easy revenue), combined with the costs of printing(which continues upwards).

Had you folks been wise, you would have re-done your blogging and made heavy use of it. In particular, you have our information of who is blogging here. You could target the ads towards us. Likewise had you pushed a CHEAP E-READER , you would continue to have TARGETED ADS. As it is, you ppl allowed your reporters to disassociate from your readers in real life as well as on the web. Worse, your reporting got less and less.

I say good riddance to the bad management (yes, that is you temple), but sad to see the reporters go.

The funny thing is, temple, you will lose more papers until you realize that you MUST CHANGE. Then and only then, will you return to profitability. Of course, by then, I suspect that the bloggers will have learned to do MUCH better work at a much lower cost.
February 27, 2009

3:42 p.m.

Suggest removal

rjnova writes:

Thank you Mr Temple for that insight to the newspaper business in Denver, and seemingly the same elsewhere. I cannot be so forgiving of Scripps. They are opportunists and over paid for newspapers everywhere thinking they would cut a fat hog.

I am sure there is much wisdom in what you say but I think it is arrogance and the poorest of management to borrow so much money that a 10-15% downturn in business puts you under. We should all be able to cut back to that extent and adjust to new market conditions. Were you still independent you might have adjusted to the Internet with hard copy and web site in some combination.

I too think the RMN lost bearing and became too liberal with Littwin, Campos, Johnson, Grego, et al,when we wanted the news without the bias.

Nevertheless I will miss the RMN and wish you folks the best of luck landing some place where you will be appreciated.
February 27, 2009

4:05 p.m.

Suggest removal

blacksho89 writes:

bronte:

ever hear of Gene Amole?
February 27, 2009

4:07 p.m.

Suggest removal

Craig writes:

Anyone who has been around the area for any length of time knows that the Rocky Mountain News is known for its basically conservative editorial views. Conservatives have long looked to the Rocky to provide a counterpoint to the more leftward leaning views of the Denver Post.

Even so, there are some who see the Rocky as too liberal. The only explanation I have for this phenomenon is that we're hearing from the most rigid right wing purists who are so steeped in conspiratorial paranoia that they see proof of the bogeyman everywhere.
February 27, 2009

5:18 p.m.

Suggest removal

rcop writes:

It is x-runner's head in the sand attitude about liberal tilt in the mainstream media that I was referring to. That he fails to see the same problem in liberal arts education is the hallmark of an ideologue.

Can't expect much insight from this crowd.

And this same crowd will never admit that the success of FoxNews is directly related to the longstanding saturation of liberal-think and news filtering in the mainstream media that so many have moved away from. The viewing audience at Fox cuts a wide swath across the political spectrum.

Sorry Craig.
February 27, 2009

5:45 p.m.

Suggest removal

John_Galt writes:

I wish it was the Post that failed!!
February 27, 2009

7:32 p.m.

Suggest removal

The_Punnisher writes:

The comPOST and the Rocky forgot ( or deliberately skewed ) the basics of REPORTING:

The FIVE Ws and an H!!!

If I get BETTER REPORTING of a story on-line ( and NOT from the AP " JOURNALISTS " ), guess where I tend to get NEWS!!

The AP has been omitting facts that skew a story, I did not rely on them to REPORT any more.

Sorry, Rocky, but that problem helped your demise...
February 27, 2009

7:35 p.m.

Suggest removal

The_Punnisher writes:

P.S.:

http://english.pravda.ru/
February 27, 2009

9 p.m.

Suggest removal

Bronte writes:

anchovie: Rather than being curious about the genesis of DIA, you doubted me, defended corruption, and noted that DIA was # 5. I shall assist.

You may only be 25 minutes from DIA, but DIA is 35–45 minutes past Stapleton (most routes lead east) and employees, businesses who use it daily, and those who fly weekly know the increased time. My BIL drove to work at Stapleton in 20-25 minutes; that has increased to 55-60 minutes to get to DIA. Increased drive time FOR EVERYONE adds air pollution, increased costs, and decreased productivity.

Stapleton brought great revenue to the city. In the history of this country, there has NEVER been a major airport closed down; especially as vibrant and powerful as Stapleton! DIA is a laughingstock and not a good neighbor. You babble about Hartsfield, yet it was merely an expansion on an existing site (as was Stapleton).

To understand, it is necessary to study the history of Stapleton, a rascal named Federico Pena, city finances, hubbing, FAA, deregulation, airlines, R & D, economics, politics, labor unions, campaigns, the black community, planned communities, financial manipulation, and projected air usage. Then, there are the pesky triplets of responsibility, morality, and ethics. In all terms, there was never a reason to replace an existing airport.

To understand, study the jobs lost due to Stapleton closing, the jobs lost due to restricting conditions at DIA, and the PERMANENT economic down-tic that DIA causes in perpetuity by businesses that look, but choose, NC, NM, TX, UT, TN, VT, NH, NJ, IL, OH, FL, TN, MN, MO, CA, or AL due to inherent weaknesses at DIA.

The vote was not binding; it would be built no matter how the vote turned out, so why did principals LIE (including the RMN)? Denver took federal funds needed by others, just to make a corrupt mayor and his friends very rich. ALL the traveling public is still paying for DIA in fees. THAT IS IMMORAL! An unnecessary airport was built and a perfectly good (and brand new) airport was destroyed.

Stapleton WAS 3RD IN THE NATION BEFORE DIA WAS BUILT? It ranked second or third behind O’Hare and Hartsfield. FACT: DIA HAS GONE DOWN TO 5th place so bragging is silly.

Stapleton Airport, only 8 minutes from downtown, was PAID FOR; all but 2 new
concourses and the new runway; easily being handled by city finances; SO WHY build a new airport? Stapleton could EASILY carry the current load of DIA at 1 % of the cost. And there would be TENS OF THOUSANDS OF MORE JOBS IN THE DENVER AREA TODAY! The very notion of DIA should make the average citizen LIVED with anger at the lies that were told to build that monstrosity, and the knowledge that nothing can be done (principals took the money & ran). Denver is stuck with the mess; 1 billion became 10 billion; folks should be ASHAMED that a louse and his SILENT accomplices (including the vaunted “RMN”) hoodwinked them.
February 27, 2009

9:55 p.m.

Suggest removal

bobdylanindenver writes:

Temple, you ran the paper into the ground.

You're a liberal, and you've ruined the RMN, just as Obama is ruining our country.

I hope you're proud of yourself.
February 27, 2009

10:25 p.m.

Suggest removal

anchovie34 writes:

Bronte, like I said, I didn't live in Denver while Stapleton airport was around. I never said it was terrible, or that DIA was the best idea ever. I did say that DIA seemed fine with me, and I typically don't mind driving an extra 20 minutes to get to the airport. Conditionally, I find it nice not having low-flying jets roar over my house every five minutes. My sister lives near O'hare in the Chicago suburbs, and you hear the planes all night and day. Besides, if Stapleton was still where it was, then all new suburban development would have been pushed beyond the airport, causing just as much congestion and pollution (that was probably the dumbest argument you could have made). The rest of your points, are understandable, but not convincing enough to make me feel bad about DIA - especially considering that it is consistently rated one of the best airports in the country by travelers. I don't know that it's such a laughing stock now that the automated baggage system has been removed - perhaps that's what you were referring to?
February 28, 2009

3:12 a.m.

Suggest removal

renaldo_phlegm writes:

Most days, the title of the top five stories on the front page of the Rocky and the Post online were exactly the same. And, if you looked at these stories, they contained almost the exact same 3 or 4 paragraphs of shallow reporting. It was rare to see an investigative story or a well-researched in-depth article.

As for editorial leanings, it seems that since the JOA both papers moved toward the center, and, with the ability to read online both liberal and conservative columnists at papers like the NYTimes, Washington Post, etc., there was little reason to read the second rate opinion pieces in the cowboy town newspapers.

Instead of exploring ways to attract new readers and bring back those who stopped reading the paper by broadening and improving the content, an effort that might have led to a more engaged and dedicated readership along with increased subscription rates, both papers focused even more on the readership that remained; illiterate sports fans reading soap opera-like sports stories and shallow "he said, she said" reports attempting to pass as news articles.

Those running the paper never seemed to figure out that those who want short and uninformative news blurbs can simply watch tv news. Sure internet advertising hurt, but people don't buy newspapers for the classifieds, they buy them to read thoughtful in-depth reporting. There's tremendous public interest in health care, but we never saw in depth articles on the finances of Kaiser Colorado or the University Hospital; how much they made, how satisfied their patients were, or how long it took to see a specialist (or how these values compared to those in other cities or countries with socialized health care like Canada and England).

We've seen lots of articles about Ward Churchill, and how he said x, his lawyer said y and Owens said z. But I don't think we've ever seen a report on how many other faculty have been accused or investigated for academic misconduct, and how the University's policies and investigations compare to those of other institutions.
(cont below)
February 28, 2009

3:13 a.m.

Suggest removal

renaldo_phlegm writes:

We read plenty of blurbs about police shootings, but rarely see reports giving statistics of how Denver compares to national averages in police shootings, investigations, or outcomes. There are never investigative reports in which reporters physically follow police, city employees or city managers to see what they're actually doing, and I can't think of an instance when I've read about an RMN reporter requesting data based on the freedom of information act.

No, as others have said, the main focus of the RMN and the Post reporters and management has not been to represent the people and protect their interests, but to ingratiate themselves with and stay on the good side of the powers that be. So while I'm sure that the mayors, police chiefs, and hospital presidents have had both papers delivered on a daily basis, it's not surprising that the citizens of the state find little reason to support newspapers that don't support them.
February 28, 2009

10:15 a.m.

Suggest removal

anchovie34 writes:

illiterate sports fans reading? hmm, perhaps you need to recheck the definition of the word illiterate. Dumba$$. What a tool.
February 28, 2009

10:48 a.m.

Suggest removal

StillUndecided writes:

I have noticed something interesting, both reading posts here and talking with people at work. Many people say that they have never, and would never, subscribe to a newspaper because it is old news. They want the up to the minute news that they get online, not yesterday's news. In the next breath, they complain that the newspapers do not do any in-depth reporting and really get to the bottom and report the whole story.

Tell me, why would a reporter spend the time to really dig deeply into a story when an increasing number of people have shown that they just want brief sound-bites and don't have the patience to wait until the whole story is uncovered?
February 28, 2009

11:14 a.m.

Suggest removal

renaldo_phlegm writes:

Awe smelly fish, did I strike a nerve? Obviously you put yourself in that category.

I didn't say EVERYONE who's interested in sports is an illiterate idiot, but if you look at the most viewed/commented on stories on the Post or News websites, almost every day they're sports and pseudo-sports related - Shanahan's McMansion, who Elway was recently seen with, Carmelo's latest traffic violation... And if you read the comments you'll see plenty of posts like yours; posts that don't make a point by people who don't understand punctuation, capitalization, or quotation. Dumb rants by people who prefer yelling about mindless drivel they can barely comprehend as opposed to intelligent and informed discussion about anything of substance that should matter to them and their community.

No, there's nothing wrong with enjoying sports, but as in all areas the News catered to the lowest common denominator; people who would never consider purchasing a newspaper subscription and who advertisers other than Sonic aren't interested in reaching.

And StillUndecided, I think you answered your own question. The papers shouldn't be catering to people who want to only read soundbites as writing novels for people who don't read isn't a particularly good business plan. Instead the News needed to attract readers who want to be well-informed and who are willing to buy a newspaper and read for a while. And most worthwhile stories go on for days, weeks and months. Stories about the economy, education, health care, politics, etc., aren't one day affairs unless they're reported as "he said, she said" with little to no context, background or analysis.
February 28, 2009

7:09 p.m.

Suggest removal

Hicky2 writes:

Most likely this was inevitable - a dying industry plus poor management. The Rocky's claim-to-fame (over the Post) was that it somehow managed to connect with its readers. Perhaps that card should have been played harder.

The 'It was a liberal paper' isn't even a minor factor. True, it was - its three daily columnists - Griego, Littwin and Johnson - were all very liberal. Griego's racial diatribes were unbearable, the other two tolerable, but too much more good in the Rocky for that to be a meaningful factor.
February 28, 2009

7:48 p.m.

Suggest removal

Bronte writes:

Blacksho89: Of course; I first met him in about 1965; I was young and full of myself and he was "Democrat" so we did not have a good conversation. However, in the "fullness of time" I got a lot smarter and he got a bit mellower and we were in perfect accord over the fraud that was perpetrated on the people through DIA. He loved Denver and knew corruption when he saw it; he was not fooled by Pena, Mizel, Fleming, Early, and the rest of those who were here to "pick pockets" and then leave the citizens with the mess. There were a number of pols (Bob Crider, Ted Hackworth, Jeanne Faatz, Don Bain) who knew the truth, but there weren't enough of them to stop the crooks.

In his heart, Wellington Webb wished he could have found another solution; he too loved Denver and Colorado and couldn't stomach the money-grubbers who came in from other areas, set to fleece the citizens, but it was just too late in the game and the papers (who THOUGHT they would benefit from the increased population that would result from the new airport would have provided them with MORE customers) would have crucified him and he would not have been able to get anything else done. He did not approve of the monstrosity on the plains either, and knew it was a scam, but did not want to go down in history as the person who “killed” Denver’s new airport.

Denver was in a mini-recession at the time and the voting fools believed the lies by Pena and crew (that the new airport would bring in new construction jobs). Pena would stand up and bang his puny little “fist” and screech “jobs is key” and the fools believed him. That was another enormous lie of course; airports are built by professional airport builders who circle the globe building airports. Time is money and the pros don’t go into communities and then waste their time recruiting; they bring their workers with them. The citizens were sold a bill of goods but that was because they were basically stupid and not able to “reason” what is truth and what is lies. There wasn't a single "job" that was going to be added, but many to be lost. WHEN will “the people” become intelligent, discerning, logical, and thoughtful? Never! They voted for sad ol “57 states” and his six-foot battle-axe and now they will do the same thing as George and Laura (but with much less class) and the numbskull voters will, yet again, scratch their heads and wonder “how they could have been so wrong YET AGAIN!!!! And, as usual, they will have been LIED TO by the RMN and the Post and their political writers. So, it seems appropriate that the RMN is being hoisted on its own petard.
February 28, 2009

8:44 p.m.

Suggest removal

jokboy4u writes:

That was all really elegant and logical sounding, but it was also a bunch of BS. The newspapers are exactly like KODAK..monopolistic egomaniacs that took about 10 years too long to realize there was an Internet. Instead of embracing it and re-inventing yourselves, you let the giant sukcing sound of classified dollars and paper-getting subscribers dwindle while you kept on doing everything the same ol' way. It's unconscienable you couldnt run your business matching revenues to overhead.. that is a formula for disaster.. and there is one finger to point there.. and it's to the leadership. Your closing is only sad because of all the "sheep" you led to this tragic pasture that will now wander aimlessly looking for their next job.

If newspapers do not SPRINT to re-create themselves on double-time and without the arrogance, the future of every newspaper property will be similar. Your lack of innovation and ability to "get it" is your only excuse, and to the extent you were a leader, the blame falls squarely on your shoulders. RIP.
February 28, 2009

10:10 p.m.

Suggest removal

Bronte writes:

Anchovie: This is not about your convenience or your opinion of DIA. It is about the RMN FAILING TO DO THEIR JOB and being complicit in fraud against local citizens, local passengers, and the flying public who will never set foot in DIA but are stuck paying for it anyway. So what if DIA is popular; it should be, at what it cost; they could have finished Stapleton in mahogany and Persian carpets for less. The voters believed the lies of a smooth talker whom they barely knew and weakened their own economic future for the rest of their lives.

The point is that DIA SHOULD NEVER HAVE BEEN BUILT! While nothing can be done now, we must remember that Denver’s economic reality was FOREVER ALTERED by citizens who abandoned their award-wining airport and traded a major source of revenue for PIE IN THE SKY! It is a CAUTIONARY TALE with enormous tentacles.

[Incidentally I rarely make “dumb” arguments; if you studied geology, knew the elevations, air currents, and weather on the major route to DIA you would have “gotten” my argument. Please, rather than assuming that others are stupid against your amazing powers of deduction, have you EVER considered that if you had greater foundational knowledge in more subjects, that you would “get” more of what was said?]

Example: your “argument” about Hartsfield was not an argument at all! [You do recall the differences between “argument” and “opinion?”] In fact, you did not compare the areas that must be considered when judging airports; location (location includes geological differences; terrain, type of soil, wind patterns, water tables, weather, inclines, and wildlife, not just “miles from city center”) size, runways, FAA certifications, effects of deregulation, hubbing, economics, routes, relationship to other hub cities, relationship with destination cities, fuel availability, passenger trends, politics, local government, availability of workforce, maintenance, ownership, and other intangibles including the current and projected economic health of the airlines themselves. In fact, you did not make the comparisons or you would know that Hartsfield compares favorably to Stapleton; they were both expansions and vied for second or third place. Hartsfield aligns with Stapleton, but is at odds with DIA. So, while you felt comfortable telling me that my argument was “dumb” I can prove that your “argument” doesn’t even exist; also it is difficult to compare Hartsfield with Coca-Cola since they were “expanding” in different decades, the government played different roles, and the world’s climate was different.

Example: You see Denver as #5 and brag. Yet, Denver used to be #3 (some months even #2) vying with O’Hare and Hartsfield (I know what those #’s mean) so I am horrified that with indebtedness of BILLIONS there is a drop to # 5. What is the point? They could have continued the Pena plan and stopped using even MORE runways and dropped to #5 without spending a dime! LOL
March 1, 2009

12:05 a.m.

Suggest removal

Bronte writes:

Anchovie: Moving on from the subjective~

FACT: The citizens “owned” Stapleton and it provided an enormous revenue stream from which ALL benefited (increased revenue means that other fees are lower or more services can be provided, so citizens paid lower fees for services; that gave them more disposable income. It also meant the city could provide more and better services for lower (or no) fees. It was a “win-win” situation; the city and citizens looked forward to it continuing forever.

However, the citizens voted to end that revenue stream by shutting down Stapleton, so all of their fees have gone up. That was a “truth” the paper never reported; the RMN is complicit in costing every household enough to buy paper subscriptions many times over. The RMN DIRECTLY caused folks to lose money out of their wallets.

You may not like the sound of airplanes your sensibilities fly in the face of economic reality. [Planes signify business deals, vacations, visits with family, weddings, new grandchildren, second honeymoons, high school reunions, and final rests, key parts of life.]

FACT: CLOSE IN AIRPORTS ARE VITAL TO A VIBRANT ECONOMY.

FACT: Denver would have a more vibrant economy, more jobs, a steadier source of revenue, and a greater base population, if DIA had never been built. [Your notions about having more people working at DIA is nonsense; if they have moved down to #5, but are employing more people than when they were # 3 flies in the face of reason, logic, and common sense. That would mean the financial drain is even worse than predicted.

Denver was on a great trajectory, FUELED BY REVENUE FROM STAPLETON! When necessary, Stapleton was expanded and improved in the normal manner. There was enough vacant land around Stapleton to expand for centuries. By closing down their close in airport, Denver (a) lost a huge block of revenue for all time (b) increased their debt ratio for decades (c) lost jobs and businesses from Stapleton (d) lost start-up businesses for DIA (e) lost destination conventions (f) lost skiers (g) lost revenue to other airports, and (h) LOST BUSINESSES THAT WOULD HAVE RELOCATED TO COLORADO, which means lost jobs (and revenue) for decades to come.

FACT: DENVER WAS #3 AT THE OLD AIRPORT FOR 1% OF THE COST! They have spent 10 billion to now be #5. This reality proves the naysayers were correct; it was NEVER possible to “grow trees to the sky” and DIA is proof. The financial and passenger projections for the new airport were ALL LIES! Stapleton NEVER operated at full capacity; there was always room for more but there weren't any more people who needed to fly through Denver. Technology means fewer business trips. Building a "bigger" airport on the plains of Colorado had NOTHING to do with demand and never will. ESPECIALLY when Stapleton could be expanded exponentially. DIA is a lie, a fraud, and a shame.
March 1, 2009

8:40 p.m.

Suggest removal

Hicky2 writes:

Bronte - VERY well said! You know that when he was elected mayor Federico Pena lived in a small house on W 26th Avenue...

I once suggested to Gene Amole he write an expose on Pena...he politely declined. :)
March 2, 2009

2:21 a.m.

Suggest removal

DUScooter writes:

But why the Rocky Mountain News? The JOA should now force the Denver Post to change its name to the Rocky and we say good-bye to the Post Name plate. Scripps really has let history, Colorado, Denver and the field of journalism down by not keeping the Rocky around. You had a GREAT opportunity to go soley to online access because you had the best web site of the two papers. You failed us jScripps. 150 years meant NOTHING to you. Loyalty was over come by corporate greed. E.W. Scripps can go to HELL for this decision. You can quote me on that as a former newspaper, radio and television journalist.
March 2, 2009

7:38 a.m.

Suggest removal

Ditto writes:

For those of you who think like Bronte it’s called checks and balances when there are two papers.

The following was sent to me on Saturday and truly sums up were we as a country are today.

About the time our original thirteen states adopted their new constitution in 1787, Alexander Tyler, a Scottish history professor at the University of Edinburgh , had this to say about the fall of the Athenian Republic some 2,000 years earlier:

"A democracy is always temporary in nature; it simply cannot exist as a permanent form of government."

"A democracy will continue to exist up until the time that voters discover they can vote themselves generous gifts from the public treasury."

"From that moment on, the majority always vote for the candidates who promise the most benefits from the public treasury, with the result that every democracy will finally collapse due to loose fiscal policy, which is always followed by a DICTATORSHIP."

"The average age of the world's greatest civilizations from the beginning of history, has been about 200 years"
March 6, 2009

12:15 p.m.

Suggest removal

kelleyosean writes:

With John Temple at the helm these past years, it's no wonder the Rocky Mtn News has been a sinking ship. His arrogant, holier than thou attitude, has been offensive to say the least. During CO's governor campaign, I called and spoke w/him as to why the 3rd party Libertarian candidate Dawn Winkler had not been allowed to voice her views via print media. He said there were only 2 real parties, and that they were not going to cover this 3rd party. I said Dawn was featured in several interviews that were on the Internet and radio and he said that only a small percentage of people actually got their news from the Internet. I said that he was sadly mistaken as more and more people were getting their info from the Internet, blog sites, and radio. After I disputed his statement, he abruptly hung up on me. Fast forward to the present. Hello John! It's no surprise your paper folded w/you running the show. A year later I called and again spoke w/him about a circulation issue which had taken an inordinate amount of time to deal with and that I finally resorted to calling him as he was in charge of the paper, more or less. He said it 'wasn't his problem' and asked why I was calling him. I said that I haven't gotten any satisfaction after talking w/several people. He gruffly said he didn't want to deal w/it and hung up. This guy obviously does not have any interpersonal skills and at that point, I cancelled my subscription. As a business owner, I want to be kept abreast of any and all problems related to my business and my bottom line is keeping our clients satisfied. I would relegate such an employee to the backroom where he wouldn't have any contact w/the public. Better yet, I probably wouldn't have hired him in the first place.

Home › News › Local News

TEMPLE: Why Denver can't support two papers

By John Temple, Rocky Mountain News (Contact)

Published February 27, 2009 at 12:05 a.m.

Related Stories

More Local News

Share

Comments

Featured

Columns & Blogs