The Fifth Estate: Alienating readers

Philadelphia magazine has covered great stories in its time. Its yearly “Best Of” awards have always been a local favorite, and continual coverage of dining and arts has kept the city connected to its culture.Time and time again, native Philadelphians return to their faithful publication to learn about the issues and events that shape the city.

This month, Philadelphia magazine alienated readers. No longer will they see superior investigative pieces written by seasoned freelancers. If you’ve been a longtime reader, you might have perused one such article by Gregory Gilderman. His “The Dead of Night,” which ran in the November 2006 issue, addressed the increasing amount of violence in Philadelphia and caught the attention of local officials.

When Gilderman’s article went to press, the response from community members and area leaders was tremendous. Gilderman’s piece brought readers back to Philadelphia magazine and reiterated the publication’s long-standing tradition to speak to residents from all walks of life – regardless of their backgrounds. This is what has kept the magazine relevant and popular among its reliable fan base.

A careful look at the magazine’s demographics shows that 62.4 percent of its readers possess an advanced degree and their median age is 48. Philadelphia magazine’s recent content has especially reflected an older demographic – to a dangerous degree. It used to be the type of magazine that could sit on the coffee table of any Philadelphian, regardless of how much money they had in the bank or where they lived.

Now, readers who expect a magazine that addresses stories for the average Philadelphian will be highly disappointed.

An example of such an insular story is Vicki Glembocki’s piece, “The Existential Crisis of the Wait-at-Home Mom,” which ran in this month’s issue. It details the stories of rich stay-at-home moms who are staging a comeback to the workforce. Sure, it’s hard to find fault with Glembocki’s writing skills. She crafts her story well, telling the sad tale of middle-aged women struggling to get back into work. It would be a perfect piece, if only Glembocki attempted to look at women from all types of backgrounds – not just the super rich.

She attempts to treat her feature piece as if the stay-at-home mom wanting to return to work is breaking news. However, with phrases like “they used to be career women, with big degrees and big-paying jobs . . . but when kids came along, they decided to give it all up to stay home and raise their families,” it’s hard to be entirely sympathetic to the women who Glembocki said “sported ginormous diamond rings, and outfits by the high-end line Beyond Yoga.”

Glembocki’s piece is nothing exceptional, in that it speaks to the common stay-at-home mom with a big pocketbook and a large amount of time on her hands.

With this in mind, the blame falls fully on the publication for once again lacking in substance. Take back your pride, Philadelphia magazine, and write the investigative articles that put Philadelphia on the map for excellent journalism. They’re missed.

Stacy Lipson can be reached at stacy.lipson@temple.edu.

Fifth Estate: State’s children on lockdown

They look like children but act like adults. Last week in Harrisburg, the Pennsylvania Senate met to discuss whether the country’s most violent juvenile offenders should face a lifetime behind bars or be given an opportunity for parole. Pennsylvania law currently states that juveniles convicted of murder can’t receive parole.

In his Philadelphia Weekly article “No Second Chances,” reporter Jamaal Abdul-Alim notes that victims’ loved ones, like Jodi Dotts, have a simple answer to that question. She “scoffed at the notion of ‘second chances’ for juvenile killers.”

Why give killers a second chance at a new life when they’ve already destroyed another family?

One of the most pressing issues that Abdul-Alim writes about is the ongoing debate of juveniles understanding the consequences of their crimes. He cites the example of Stacey Torrance, who committed robbery at the age of 14 and then said he didn’t know the repercussions of his actions.

Torrance, a first-time offender, was sentenced to life in prison for robbery, in which the victim was killed by other people hours after he left the scene. At first glance, an outsider could label Torrance as another offender who blames the city for his actions.

Another concern Abdul-Alim brings up is the issue of first-time offenders.

“Not all juvenile lifers are actual killers, and some are first-time offenders – factors that advocates say should be considered when juveniles are punished for their crimes,” Abdul-Alim said.

Maybe there is a tiny bit of truth to Torrance’s claims. After all, he was a first-time offender. If Torrance had a role model to look up to, he might not be behind bars.

Philadelphia is no stranger to juvenile violence. Who can forget Sean Patrick Conroy, a 36-year-old Starbucks employee who died of respiratory distress after being attacked by four juveniles on a SEPTA platform last March?

Brutal violence has left the city in a state of agitation. According to the Philadelphia Police Department, there have been 252 murders in Philadelphia so far in 2008. Nineteen of the people arrested and charged in these homicide cases were juveniles.

Abdul-Alim’s article is superior in that it objectively addresses all of the issues that come with violent juvenile offenders, without showing favoritism for either side throughout the piece.

It’s easy to be harsh, but even easier to turn a blind eye to all of the factors. In Pennsylvania, 452 juveniles in the prison system are sentenced to life without parole. That’s 452 juveniles who will die behind state bars for heinous crimes they committed under the age of 18.

Do we pin the blame solely on the juveniles involved? When do we start to acknowledge that the blame should be spread to both parents and members of the community? Each year, fewer and fewer residents are registering to volunteer in after-school programs across Philadelphia. It’s no wonder that so many juveniles are committing violent crimes. Without guidance and support, many of the city’s youth are learning that the only way to get attention is by committing a crime. It’s no way to go through life.

Abdul-Alim’s report of juvenile offenders is a reminder that this issue is far from over. No matter what the Pennsylvania Senate decides, the topic will remain close to both the victims’ families and juvenile offenders. For them, there is no easy solution.

Stacy Lipson can be reached at stacy.lipson@temple.edu.

The Fifth Estate: Selling beaches and skin on philly.com

These are anxious times at the Philadelphia Inquirer and the Daily News.

Today, newspapers are half as thick as they were only 20 years ago. Advertisers are leaving and many newspapers in the United States are barely keeping afloat. The New Yorker’s Eric Alterman said it best: “Newspapers are dying. The evidence of diminishment in economic vitality, editorial quality, depth, personnel and the overall number of papers is everywhere.”

In an attempt to reach new readers, editors are redirecting some of their energy into maintaining Web sites with multimedia. Take for instance, the philly.com’s popular video series Down the Shore. At first glance, it seems like a great piece of service journalism. The show highlights the best restaurants, shops and attractions to visit on the beach. Seems like an innovative way to attract viewers, right?

Until you click on the video, that is. Each short piece focuses on the escapades of Lilliana, Sandy, Julie and two others as they travel to Cape May, Atlantic City and Ventnor City. I expected to see a quick, informative segment on New Jersey beaches. Unfortunately, the 17-part series is best known for its provocative display of women in bikinis. The five hosts speak about the Jersey shore like they’re on a commercial sponsored by the tourism department. Instead of focusing on popular destinations, the video highlights full-body shots of the hosts.

The series is, in a word, sensational. When historical newspapers like the Philadelphia Inquirer and the Daily News makes the leap to glorified television, it’s time to hold editors at philly.com accountable.

Today’s media have already reached epic proportions in advertising sex. At what point do we, as journalists, draw the line? Quality journalism isn’t about sensationalism. Sure, it might generate plenty of Web hits, but can’t you find a more respectable way to make money?

In the future, our generation will be remembered for our insatiable need for sensationalism. The more shocking or attention-grabbing something is the fact that we can’t get enough of it.

A good example of video journalism can be found on cnn.com, which generates 2.3 million hits per week while keeping traditional values and ethics in place. Covering topics like depression, voter-age gap and man-on-the-street interviews, CNN has found a way to grab the attention of viewers while keeping advertisers interested.

It’s no wonder that the Online News Association recognized cnn.com for general excellence in maximizing the Web’s resources. To earn this award, journalists are “providing material that provokes readers in a thoughtful manner, while adhering to the highest journalistic standards.”

Hear that, philly.com? The same quality of reporting should be in every story, whether it’s a video, news report or special feature. And yes, it’s still possible to keep the public’s interest without being overtly sexual. Viewers deserve more than a watered-down version of Down the Shore. They deserve a high-quality report about where to go on the beach. Is that too much to ask?

Stacy Lipson can be reached at stacy.lipson@temple.edu.