The sixty-third annual convention of editorial writers could hardly have met at a worse time.
Only a few days earlier, many of the papers represented carried stories saying that despite some positive signs in the rest of the economy, the downturn for newspapers had yet to hit bottom. The Pew Research Center for People and the Press had released a survey showing public confidence in the mainstream news media at a new low; 63 percent of those polled said news stories were often inaccurate. Serious questions continued to be raised as to whether some cities—Philadelphia being the most notable—would even retain a major daily.
Earlier in the year, the American Society of Newspaper Editors had for only the second time in its eighty-seven-year history canceled its convention. At a time when editors were cutting staff, travel, and newsroom budgets to the bone, how could they bring themselves to fly off to Chicago for what would be perceived as fun and games? ASNE bigwigs looked at the small number of signups and concluded they had only one option: to pull the plug.
As it turned out, leaders of the National Conference of Editorial Writers thought about doing the same thing. And they might have, had not the organization faced a high penalty if it reneged on its contract with the host hotel. Acting President Tom Waseleski said it would cost the organization less to incur the losses of a sparsely attended convention than to cancel it.
And sparsely attended it was. Only about eighty men and women trickled into Salt Lake City’s Hilton Hotel for the late September conference, and many of them were retirees who paid their own way or representatives of various good government and environmental organizations out to get the ear of the editorial writers. Outside, the late September weather was warm and sunny, but spirits inside were decidedly gloomy. “Not here this year,” was a common response when people asked the whereabouts of writers who had attended almost all recent conventions.
Some of those who did attend—like the NCEW president who only weeks before had to step down from the office after taking a non-newspaper job—had gone into other lines of work. Unlike past conventions, when members asking questions of a speaker were asked to approach a microphone so they could be heard by the large audience, the questioners this year were easily audible to the small numbers present.
But in a couple of ways the convention proceeded as normal. A major draw at all NCEW conventions is the all-day critique session. In advance of the convention, members carefully comb through each others’ editorial and op-ed pages so that they can present detailed suggestions to the five or so writers in each group as to how their pages and editorials could be improved. It’s a painstaking process that takes a lot of work, and it’s uncomfortable if not outright embarrassing to be the writer at the receiving end of the criticism. One writer at the session I attended this year sheepishly explained the stodgy, old-fashioned look of his pages by pointing out his publisher’s aversion to any change. One would think this was 1959 instead of 2009, except for the fact that this newspaper’s circulation had recently dipped by 25 percent.
As in past conventions, the editorial writers also heard from prominent present and former public officials from the area. This year, former George W. Bush administration Secretary of Health and Human Services Michael O. Leavitt, who had also been a Utah governor, spoke about health care reform and the dangers of deficit spending. John Hughes, a Brigham Young University professor and former editor of The Christian Science Monitor and Deseret News, discussed freedom, credibility, and tradition in this day of online journalism.