from Smoky Mountain News... "I’ve been addicted to newspapers since I was a kid. I love to wake up in the morning, spread the paper out on the kitchen table or hold it up close to my face. I look forward to curling up in the evening in my favorite reading chair, thumbing through pages with musical accompaniment.
"Everyone in my family -- mother, father, two brothers -- are the same. We are all addicted, so perhaps it wasn’t surprising that the youngest in a family of obsessed newspaper readers would end up in the business.
"Since this is a love and my life, I watch the industry closely to see what the leaders are doing. And after what happened earlier this month, I can’t decide if I’m fearful for our future or somewhat encouraged.
"Maybe others noticed.
"On Sept. 6, Gannett’s Asheville Citizen-Times announced in a page 1 article that it was cutting back on daily features -- fewer editorial page columnists, less state news, fewer stock listings, reduced comics, no TV grid. Why?
"Because of our increased capability to carry news and information on our website ... we are transforming the newspaper, the article read.
"Damn. I was shocked, disappointed. I go on-line many times a day, but a newspaper that already had a news hole that was much too small was going to get even smaller. I mean a 6-page A section is almost insulting.
"And if Gannett was doing this, I thought, other papers would surely follow suit. Surely it was intensively researched and backed up by readership surveys. Big companies like this don’t just veer off and make snap decisions.
"One day later, however, managers at the newspaper did indeed flip- flop. Other newspaper addicts like me deluged the offices with phone calls, emails and letters. Hundreds. In one day, comics and two full pages of stocks were back.
"We listened to the community and will heed the message we received, Publisher Virgil Smith wrote in another page 1 story.
"I was breathing a little easier. This experiment with on-line newspapering had failed because readers weren’t ready for it. The major player in this media market had acquiesced to its readers, solidifying my belief that print newspapers are still in de-mand and worthwhile.
"Then, however, a week later, the truth was out. The whole messy, failed experiment had nothing to do with readers or on-line capabilities, as we were originally told.
"We are attempting to reduce our operating costs without impacting the number of employees at our newspaper as a result of anticipated newsprint increases and other increases in expenses. Thus we have sought newsprint savings by tightening the news produced, Smith wrote in a lead editorial on Sept. 13.
"Profit margins. Stockholder expectations. What a damn rip off. And besides, I felt duped. Why tell me one day it’s all about on-line capabilities and one week later tell me it’s about profits. Which is it?
"For those who don’t know, Gannett, which owns the ACT and USA Today, is the major player in the daily newspaper industry. It now owns or will own (some deals are pending) 99 dailies in the U.S. and 15 in the United Kingdom, according to an article in last month’s American Journalism Review. The company that owns our regional daily newspaper now has almost 14 percent of the nation’s daily newspaper circulation.
"Daily newspapers are extremely profitable. For those that are publicly traded, the average profit margin is 22.2 percent. For Gannett, however, the margin is 24.6 percent. Because of its size, it controls newsprint prices and other supplies needed for newspapering. According to John Morton, a newspaper consultant who wrote the article in the American Review, Gannett has another policy that helps profits. It has gone from being a silent partner in its newspapers to “stringent manager.” Hence, I suspect, the fiasco of a couple of weeks ago.
"What are we readers to make of all this?
"For one, and this should not surprise anyone, many daily newspapers are increasingly catering to the whims of stockholder instead of the needs of their community. The Fayetteville Observer Times is the only family-run daily left in North Carolina. The rest are all owned by media giants. Profit margins are not allowed to fluctuate in those huge companies, so the member newspapers simply cut costs when times get tough. It has been happening around the country, but I think what happened earlier this month at the ACT is the most graphic illustration I’ve encountered at a newspaper I read every day. The community served is the loser, not those who own the paper.
"Mid-sized cities with mid-sized newspapers will suffer. The large Gannett newspapers, I suspect, will have their way while the smaller properties like Asheville will be manhandled by corporate chieftains. In the long run, these crazy experiments could turn people away from newspapers. That’s not good for our industry. Good newspapers make the medium stronger, and that helps us all. Weak newspapers, on the other hand, open the door for television, radio, direct mail, and our other competitors.
"The good news?
"People love newspapers. Thousands share my addiction. They are not ready for electronic newspapering, and they let Smith and his bosses know that. For all newspapers, little ones like ours and huge ones like the New York Times, that should be reassuring.
"People are reading. Hallelujah."
-- Is there a future for newspapers?< (10/3/2000) by Scott McLeod, SMN Publisher and Editor

"In Appalachia, there's still a lot of open, undeveloped land (for the time being, anyway). Land that's in the hands of people who've never had much else. Who among us has the right to tell them not to sell? Who has the right to tell them not to accept more for each acre than could be made in a year of farming? That decision is theirs alone to make. Some of us, though, do believe it is necessary to inform everyone (who will listen) about the need to keep some of that land in its current state of undeveloped-ness.
"Once was the time that generation after generation of a family could be raised on the same 'hundred acres without ever a thought of selling. As the patriarch grew old and passed on, there were younger brothers and sons coming up to grab the reins. But today's outlook is different. Today's outlook sees pasture after pasture, ridge after ridge succumb to development. Land For Sale!
"One of the most endangered (yes, I must say endangered), pieces of undeveloped land in Northeast Tennessee is Unicoi County's Rocky Fork. The property is a privately owned, ten-thousand-acre tract of forest land. It has been managed for timber production since the 1800s and has been leased by the Tennessee Wildlife Resources Agency (TWRA) for more than four decades. Hundreds of thousands, if not millions, of dollars of state taxpayer dollars have been invested in enhancing the woodland habitat of Rocky Fork. It supports premier trout streams, irreplaceable wildlife habitat, economically important recreational opportunities, and a solid history of agricultural income. Rocky Fork faces the very real possibility, however, of being sold and sub-divided into smaller tracts for development. Recently, a representative of the TWRA indicated that their lease on Rocky Fork is expiring, and the investment company that owns it only wants to renew a year at a time, because they're thinking of selling the property. This would be second sale of the property in just four years.
"In today's climate of profit-motivated thought, there are really only a few ways (aside from state or federal acquisition) to avoid the sale and development of large (200+ acres), privately owned tracts of Appalachia. Those who own such land should, therefore, consider making the very tough decision to permanently set aside the rights to develop it. Often called conservation easements, these inducements rely on good-natured landowners who love the little bit of earth that's theirs to shepherd and are committed to ensuring it remains intact. The primary benefit of selling, willing, or donating a property's development rights is property tax relief. If the tax assessment is based on use as agricultural land or wildlife habitat, then it must be taxed at a lower rate than land subject to development. Also, there are state and federal programs administered by agencies, like the U.S. Department of Agriculture, that make regular payments to landowners who choose conservation-minded management options. This may, or may not, be the right solution for the problem that Rocky Fork finds itself in, but it might be the right solution for you or someone you know.
"For more on this and other highland issues, including Rocky Fork, please visit The Highland Voice." -- Zeke, Not Your Average Urban Sprawl Article ('cause it's so close to home).

"It might be well if we continually reminded ourselves of the nature of our love: that in loving men and women and the fields and woods, we are loving God; that he is the Spirit within them that draws us to them; that in addition to being concrete individual presences, they are symbols of him in the world, moments of eternal life."
-- The Road Home
James McBride Dabbs, University of South Carolina, Sumter