Slog

News & Arts

Line Out

Music & Nightlife

« What Do Georges Méliès's… | Kindle-Ripping »

Monday, March 16, 2009

City / Media What's Been Lost: Regina Hackett

Posted by Eli Sanders on Mon, Mar 16, 2009 at 11:15 AM

Another Seattle Post-Intelligencer staffer describes what this city will have lost when, after tomorrow, the newspaper's print edition ceases to exist. Here's longtime P-I art critic Regina Hackett, going out swinging as she heads for new bloggy pastures:

The P-I offered a reasonably sensible collection of stories written without the we-precious-few tone of the Times, which rubs itself against the legs of the comfortably middle-class like a cat looking for a handout. The P-I connects with its city without undo flattery.

If the P-I were an art exhibit, I'd call it uneven. Who's newspaper isn't? But deep in the DNA of the P-I is the idea of standing up for the little guy, because the P-I has always been the little guy. I look around the shop and see first-rate reporters, editors, photographers and graphic artists. Their shine covers the conspicuously lackluster efforts of others, the call-it-in crowd, who are a minority.

I love the entire sports crew and the brilliantly burrowing moles in business. Why would someone like myself, who doesn't care at all about sports, and who adds and subtracts on my fingers, read sports and business stories? For the talent. The energy. The now-here-this.

Hats off to the P-I's new media. The paper's circulation is 114,000, and new media drew half-a-billion page views last year. I'm thrilled with my blog to have been a tiny part in it.

Hats off to all the story tellers, and hats off to the fact finders. Hats off to Dave Horsey.

Besides Dave, I hate to mention individuals, because I'll leave too many out who deserve to be mentioned. Plus, even though you're doing an obit, the individuals are very much alive.

I'll most miss being around people who always ask, How do you know that? They offer me stability and solid ground. I'll miss their company. Sure, I'll still see many of them, but it's different in a bar than on a story.

Illustration by Andrew Saeger.

Share via

Comments (28) RSS

Oldest First Unregistered On Registered On Add a comment

i hate to tell you this, but you are actually not the "little guy." the hearst corportation is way huger than the seattle times company.

Posted by arbinger on March 16, 2009 at 11:18 AM

</i> plz

Posted by Ben on March 16, 2009 at 11:23 AM

There she goes again, the hyper self-important Hack-ette, who just can't help running down the Times.
Stay classy, Regina.
And enjoy the silent solitude of your new venture.
You, I won't miss.

Posted by Inky on March 16, 2009 at 11:23 AM

If nothing else, I guess this entry points out the importance of copy editors.

Posted by leek on March 16, 2009 at 11:26 AM

The Times apparently has their concern trolls out in force. What will you do when your paper finally, mercifully, blessedly dies it so richly deserved death?

I'd sooner have a no newspaper town than a one newspaper town, if that paper is The Seattle Times

Posted by Concern Trolls: Paid by the post? on March 16, 2009 at 11:26 AM

What's been lost? Well, competition, for starters.

Economic competition: You can bet money that the cost of a subscription to the Times is going to go through the roof almost immediately. Ditto for advertising rates.

Journalistic competition: The news is now what the Times says it is. They have just become the sole arbiter of what's important, what gets covered (and what doesn't), and how it gets covered.

Neither of these are a good thing. I mourn your loss, Seattle.

Posted by Fifty-Two-Eighty on March 16, 2009 at 11:32 AM

@5: Not bloody likely. Uncle Frank blocked his employees' ability to post comments on the Slog a coupla months ago.

Posted by Jeepers on March 16, 2009 at 11:38 AM

@1 -- Seriously! Since when is Hearst representative of "the little guy"?

Posted by Jane on March 16, 2009 at 11:41 AM

Regina calling the PI/Heart Corp. the "Little Guy" certainly speaks to her credibility on all topics.

Does she think Wal*Mart is just a li'l ol' ma 'n' pop store?

Posted by Jeff on March 16, 2009 at 11:44 AM

I work for the Times, and I'm not posting this corporation stuff (though I do think this person has a point, in that the Times is a smaller, family-owned business, even if that family's politics isn't what everyone digs).

PS: My ability to comment here appears to be unimpeded.

Posted by crassive on March 16, 2009 at 11:50 AM

The PI is not the Hearst Corporation. Are you your landlord?

Posted by Regina Hackett on March 16, 2009 at 11:51 AM

The P-I was for the bland people within the city limits. The Times was for the bland people in the suburbs.

That's about the only difference.

Posted by King Rat on March 16, 2009 at 11:52 AM

i cant wait until the paper finally goes away and everyone shuts up about it. jesus christ you'd think they were tearing down the space needle or something.

Posted by burgin99 on March 16, 2009 at 11:56 AM

That is a horrible analogy, #11. If Hearst was just the "landlord" why didn't you all just move to a new "apartment"?

Posted by t on March 16, 2009 at 12:03 PM

I can't believe WIS hasn't told us how he won't subscribe to the Times. I mean, this is the first PI post where he hasn't shared that info with Slog.

Posted by heywhatsit on March 16, 2009 at 12:10 PM

The Times isn't a sweet little old family company either. Knight-Ridder is just as big as Hearst.

Posted by Fnarf on March 16, 2009 at 12:12 PM

This is the dismantling of media consolidation, which is a good thing for journalism and democracy. I keep hearing descriptions of the loss of ONE PAPER as the destruction of journalism. The only thing that is dying is the giant corporate model. Small, niche publications are doing just fine.

Posted by Thomas Westgard on March 16, 2009 at 12:16 PM

So what? the comics stink at the PI and unless you have decent comics I will not subscribe. Folks don't want to admit it but the comics count. If the PI is supposed to appeal to a certain type of reader or class then who the hell are those comics meant for? I am thinking exurban six-year-olds

Also the difference between reporting styles is less and less important when so much of the content seems to be off the wire anymore.

Posted by Kip Waddle on March 16, 2009 at 12:17 PM

Where do you think the wire comes from, Kip? Who pays for it?

Posted by Fnarf on March 16, 2009 at 12:20 PM

fnarf - Who cares where the wire comes from. We are talking about the relative styles of reporting in each paper "whats been lost" seems less relevant today given the reduction in local writing and a dependence on wire services. Both papers seem equally affected by this tendency.

Seems to me even movie reviews are increasingly "off the wire"

Posted by Kip Waddle on March 16, 2009 at 12:35 PM

@16, it's 49.5 owned by McClatchy, not Knight Ridder. But point taken.

Posted by heywhatsit on March 16, 2009 at 12:35 PM

@16: Knight-Ridder? Yeah, you've got credibility on this issue.

Plus, minority interests don't count. The Blethen family has total decision-making control.

Posted by rjh on March 16, 2009 at 12:39 PM

What's the difference between the P-I and the Times? One says, "Eh?" and the other says, "Huh?"

Posted by BaldomeroG on March 16, 2009 at 12:39 PM

@17: "small niche publications"?! Gimme a break. I want a newsroom filled with reporters hungry for a scoop, pining for a Pulitzer and eager to bury the competition across town. I want investigative reporting and in-depth coverage.

People seem to think that content just magically appears and posts itself to the net.

Posted by gnossos on March 16, 2009 at 12:39 PM

Yes, McClatchy bought Knight-Ridder, I'm sorry.

My point about the wire, Kip, is that fewer papers buying fewer stories from the wire services means fewer reporters working for the wire services means fewer reporters and less news. That sucks.

And the P-I still did a ton of local and investigative reporting, until today. Numerous in-depth reports have appeared there. And when they stop, the competitive drive at the Times will shrink accordingly, and their coverage will suck worse too. Who's going to push them to excel? Not blogs, that's for sure.

Posted by Fnarf on March 16, 2009 at 12:50 PM

Good to know you're not bitter, Regina.

Posted by bigyaz on March 16, 2009 at 12:56 PM

Oh Reginna-I've always wanted to take a good poke at your big ass.

Posted by Dan Savage on March 16, 2009 at 2:21 PM

Hearst Corporation pull plug on Seattle P-I print edition, Seattle P-I publish final print edition, freak out, online-only out, SEATTLE P-I BECOME ONLINE-ONLY NEWSPAPER!

ONLINE-ONLY SEATTLE P-I WILL SMASH ONLINE-ONLY SEATTLE TIMES!

And no, I don't feel like letting it go.

Posted by The Incredible Sulk on March 16, 2009 at 3:54 PM