Market Research

In today's editorial meeting notes (sent to everyone who works in the newsroom), the editors discussed a "reader group" they talked with. Any guesses as to what these readers said they wanted in the paper?

More stories about "making the world a better place."

"Not only pointing out the wrong, but pointing out achievements and solutions."

"Stories about people who have overcome obstacles. Lessons . . . but brief."

"They didn't want 'fluff' stories."

"Higher quality but not necessarily longer."

Basically, what every newspaper reader is drilled to say, before going home and reading the comics. The bit about no "fluff" is a flat-out lie -- if no one wanted stories that weren't of great importance, than stories about the Lakers wouldn't consistently make the online top 10. Multiple times.

People always say they want to read good news and stories about people making a difference, but if that was true we'd never have come up with "If it bleeds, it leads."

And higher quality but not longer? Why not ask pigs to fly? There's only so much you can do with 60 lines.

That's the problem with focus groups -- they don't encourage people to give honest opinions (people may not even realize what they really want anyway). People are put on the spot and you don't want to say something that will make them look stupid, such as, "I sure wish you'd run more stories on 'The O.C.'!"

What I think people really want from our newspaper is for it to take their particular slant on the world and inject it into every story. If we were to print two editions -- one in which the liberals control the media, the other the conservatives -- we'd probably be the most popular paper in the country.

Look at Fox News.