TUESDAY'S LETTERS: One Theory on Declining Circ We Haven't Heard

By: E&P Staff Today a longtime circulation director argues that one reason for declining numbers is a lack of attention paid to the carriers who deliver the final products to subscribers' doorsteps. Also, Judy Miller continues to be a lightning rod, and some readers still have unanswered questions.

***

Here's One Reason Circ is Declining?

I have been a circulation director at daily and weekly newspapers for over 25 years. At present I'm with a farm industry weekly newspaper in Ohio.

My concern over the years is that the top newspaper executives don't care much about the delivery of their newspaper after it leaves the dock. They spend millions on getting a good-looking newspaper ready for their customers but very little on delivery. My experience is that customers get very upset when they don't receive their paper on time or not at all each day. This is mostly caused by carrier turnover.

The carriers are paid very little and so if they are not making money on their routes they quit, causing a new carrier to take over. This causes late delivery and missed delivery until the new carrier can learn the route. My daily paper has a complete turnover at least four times a year, which causes late or no paper. This same daily newspaper has a large turnover of district manages. The district managers become substitute carriers until they can find another body to do their routes. They get discouraged and move on to other jobs. This goes on in most newspapers today, daily and weekly alike.

I believe that these top executives should soon come to realize that the days of the little merchants are over. Youth carriers are about a thing of the past with more adults carrying papers by automobile. Carriers don't have to be considered employees but should be paid enough to make a comfortable profit while on their routes...

I really don't think much will change until these newspapers find their papers stacked up at the docks and there is no one left to carry them. That won't happen, I'm sure. So it will go on and on and everyone will wonder why circulation is falling and blame it on everything else but the real reason. Not enough paid for delivery of the newspapers.

Thank you for your time.

Howard Marsh
Circulation Director
Farm and Dairy
Salem, Ohio

***

Our Dead and Theirs

I agree with the Steve Shender of California, who suggested in yesterday's letters column that newspapers prominently publish the number of American casualties on the front pages every day. They should also include updates on the number of Iraqi civilians who have been killed in this atrocious war.

Beth Adelman Torres
Bronx, N.Y.

***

Re: Miller Fights Back

Is it not amazing that a former staffer critiques the NYT for sloppy journalism? Is it any wonder that the public in poll after poll screams that they do not trust the press? The editors have brought this upon themselves.

As an example of abysmal lack of balance, I defy you to find balanced stories on Global Warming. It is an editorial "sacred cow" and therefore the editors see no need to provide balance. Journalistic integrity has become an oxymoronic anachronism. Editors need to be doing it much better.

John Wilder

***

How come Judy Miller can remember "vividly" that she pressed her editor to pursue the Joe Wilson story, but she can't remotely recall how Valerie Plame's name got into her reporter's notebook?

Molly Gordy

***

What was Judith Miller reporting about and for whom was she reporting?

Below is a letter not published by the New York Times back in August. I am sure I am among many thousands of subscribers who sent similar letters while witnessing a paper we have admired through the years slide into insignificance on such an important issue as the Gulf War II. Neither the publisher nor the editor have come close to answering the fundamental question we still have about Judith Miller: what was she reporting about and to whom was she reporting?

Both Sulzberger and Keller should tender their resignations and turn the Old Grey Lady over to professional journalists.

Here is the letter:

Dear Editor:

Once again the New York Times has gone to the editorial mat to defend its reporter Judith Miller. I regret to inform you that out here in the vast Middle Earth of America you are not getting much of a sympathetic ear. Maybe it is because we distrust both coasts and their flashy reporters. But my guess is that out here you really have so show folks the truth if you want to convince them.

There are three big gaps in the Miller story about which we have been shown almost nothing. First, Miller was all over the Plame outing story but there has been no evidence that she ever wrote a story about the affair or even planned to. What was she "reporting" on and two whom was she giving her reports? Second, it seems that most if not all the other reporters got permission from their "sources" to testify. There is no evidence that Ms. Miller has even asked for equal permission. Why?

The third gap may be biggest. The New York Times itself looks as though it is hiding its own deep involvement, both at the level of the publisher and of the editorial board, in the journalistic skullduggery surrounding this war, the "fixing" of evidence for going to war and the subsequent reportage of it. In sum, out here in the midlands we do not trust your reporting anymore on major issues. This is serious business for a newspaper, and you do not seem to be listening to those questioning your veracity.

I do not expect you to print this letter, but you ought to.

Frank K. Flinn
St. Louis, Mo.