Did you catch the brief item in the Star-Advertiser this week announcing that the winners of Pa’i Awards presented by the Hawaii Publishers Association were announced at a luncheon on Wednesday.
Although the article appears behind the “premium content” pay wall, it had only minimal substance.
These awards used to be big deals, as newspapers and magazines from around the state competed for recognition.
Down at the bottom of the short S-A story came this aside: “The Honolulu Star-Advertiser and the Maui News did not submit entries.”
I have to wonder, “why not?” Why doesn’t the state’s largest newspaper take part? Do they think the S-A would automatically run away with all the awards? Are they avoiding direct competition and comparisons? Is it the result of some internal political differences within the publishers association? Or is it just a matter of money, not having cash for the entry fees?
Whatever the explanation, it seems like quite a shame and denies S-A staff their chance to display their skills to a broader audience.
The article refers readers who want a list of winners to the Publishers’ web site.
But that turned out to be quite a disappointment. The list of winning entries includes first and second place in each category, but only identifies the publication. There is no information provided about the winning entries themselves or the reporters, photographers, or designers who produced the winners. Okay, they want to focus on the publishers, but that really requires showcasing the actual work product that the publishers are recognized for, doesn’t it?
It’s the folks on the ground who do the heavy lifting, who continue to try to do their best under less than ideal conditions in the face of budget restrictions, staff cuts, threats of further cutbacks and layoffs, all against the backdrop of a declining industry. In my view, they deserve recognition for their winning ways.
I have to give the publishers association a failing grade for their public relations effort on this one. It’s a lost opportunity to create a little public interest in what’s being published.
Agreed!
Disappointing that they wouldn’t give the who’s and the what’s…
Also, is online publishing disqualified? I was surprised that Civil Beat wasn’t in the mix at all.
West Hawaii Today was honored recently at the 27th annual Hawaii Publishers Association’s Pa‘i Awards in Honolulu.
Reporter Nancy Cook Lauer won first place in the Spot News Reporting category for her reporting of a behind-the scenes lobbying move that caused a last-minute line shift benefiting a county councilman in “The Onishi curve.”
“Fascinating blend of spot news and in-depth reporting. Commendably, the reader is left to decide how to feel about this,” judges said of Cook Lauer’s story.
Reporter Chelsea Jensen won second place in the Spot News Photography category for her image capturing the ocean draining from the bay surrounding Kailua Pier during the March 11 tsunami.
“This is a powerful photo that works very well with the coinciding story,” judges said. “Because many parts of the affected area are dark, it is somewhat difficult to differentiate one damaged area from another. Also, there are no people involved, so the emotional level — although the damage is clear — is lessened a bit. Still, this is a great photo that clearly captured what the photographer set out to capture.”
Page designer Michael Gifford won second place in the Excellence in Design for newsprint category for his front page design of the 9/11 anniversary.
“In design, sometimes the best principle is ‘Keep it simple.’ In this case, the designer turned the page sideways and made use of a photo that was worth more than 1,000 words,” judges said. “The typography is clean and effective. The typography at the bottom is well-placed and effective.”
Page designer Randy Wrighthouse won first place in the Excellence Cover Design for newsprint category for his People and Places layout of an article and photos about a Scrabble group that meets weekly.
“The designer effectively combined different images and text into a beautiful cover. The individual Scrabble tiles provides interest and texture on the cover,” judges said. “It’s a unique, lively composition. The designer clearly is skilled at working with a grid and visually balancing many different elements. This cover is creative, inviting and fun.”
Page designer Brenda Jensen won second place in the Excellence Cover Design for newsprint category for her Home layout of an article and photos about turning hubcaps into works of art.
“The hubcap photos are vivid and engaging. I like that the designer chose to publish the photos at different sizes, creating a whimsical effect,” judges said. “Having the text wrap around the photos creates a balanced, unified design. This cover is a winner for its simplicity and playfulness.” — WHT
It’s all about the bottom line. Now that the Bulletin has no competition why spend the money. When two papers exsisted they both made a big deal about the PAI’s so they could win bragging rights. Obviously pride in what they produce, and staff moral, lose out to the bottom line.
It costs money to enter.
If money is an issue, that’s pathetic. Maybe they wanted to spare themselves the embarrassment of not winning anything? Just kidding. Yes, it is a shame their staffers weren’t afforded a chance for a brief stay in the spotlight for all the work they put into their craft.
The staffers are allowed to enter as long as they pay for it themselves, and in the past, most Star-Bulletin wins were entered privately while the Advertiser entries were corporate-sponsored
As I said, that’s pathetic. You’d think with the almighty monopoly in place, they would budget for entries into these awards. But, I suppose the Canadian owner has a lot of making up to do to cover the millions of dollars lost during the Star-Bulletin days. Too bad.
Ian… remember when the Star-Bulletin used to pound the competition, sometimes taking several top awards?
It was a big morale booster and a point of pride for the staff knowing that despite being the smaller daily, we could create a great product.
To not participate in an industry competition is sad.
And just whom would the S-A “pound” today Dean-O? The 8,000 circulation Garden Isle paper?? Honolulu Weekly?? This is one of the problems with blogs….people just make it up and it suddenly becomes so. Like Sadvertiser (likely someone who didn’t get hired) who proclaims that the SB used to make the staffers pay for their own entries. Pure fiction. I am a SB staffer now SA with over 20 years and I submitted a couple entries every year until the merge. The company paid for them just like they did at the Advertiser. If you don’t believe it check with the HPA. So much negativity and hate on this blog….god people, lighten up, smile, breathe.
Sky: Thanks for setting the record straight on payment of entry fees. That being said, it’s curious why there were no Star-Advertiser entries this year. It’s not an opportunity to “pound” the competition, but one that affords journalists a chance to receive well-earned recognition. And, please, spare me the “lighten up” attitude. I know a few former Advertiser staffers — a couple of whom I saw just recently and with more experience than you — who are still unemployed and grabbing freelance opportunities where ever and whenever they can. As a former Star-Bulletin staffer, you very well know it could easily have been the Advertiser as the surviving paper. So, while I appreciate your information and perspective, let’s remain sensitive to those people whose lives and livelihood were forever changed with the Advertiser’s closure. Sorry, back to work …
It’s not a matter of who they can pound. You missed my point.
“To not participate in an industry competition is sad.”
It’s participation that counts. As Craig said, it provides staffers with an opportunity to be recognized for their work.
“The Sky is Falling” there would be reason enough to lighten up if the remaining daily continued to produce good journalism. But unfortunately this is not the case. Today’s paper is a good example with sunday being a slow newsday they could have done a feature on the eclipse-but with no competition to push them they simply fill their pages with the same old second rate product they are know for.
See what I mean Craig. Norm (ex photographer at SA I think) is suddenly an expert on what a daily paper’s news content should look like and just can’t help himself but take another of a never ending cheap shot at the paper who didn’t offer him a job. As to my lighten up comment I was just trying to say stop being so mean and nasty. We all remain sensitive to those that did not get hired and feel very fortunate we remain employed. You are absolutely correct that it could have easily been the other way around and then there would be another different slew of folks posting negative comments about Gannett and the Honolulu Advertiser. Nobody is at fault here. It is what it is. Can’t we all just get along?
Sky-I knew I would not be picked up, but I do think 18 years of being on the staff, much of it being in the newsroom, gives my opinions of the current paper some merit. And the way the SA management handled the shut down was so unprofessional and mean spirited, plus their ruthless business practices since then, sometimes make it hard to remain objective.
ilind.net July 5, 2001:
More feedback on the recent SPJ “Excellence in Journalism” competition. I was reminded that the Star-Bulletin was in limbo early this year as entries were due in various local and national competitions. The paper was still owned by Liberty Newspapers, but the sale to David Black was scheduled to close in mid-March. In the meantime, Liberty (and it’s JOA partner, Gannett) were trying to keep expenses to a minimum and to avoid contributing to the Star-Bulletin’s post-sale success, even prohibiting staff from using on-the-job time to work on transition issues.
So Liberty/Gannett said they would only pay for a token number of entry fees. Black, although only the prospective owner at that point, agreed to pay for an additional batch. But other entry fees ended up being paid by individual staffers who thought their work deserved to be considered. That didn’t seem unreasonable.
As one staffer commented: “what bugs me was that since we were all limited in the number of entries we submitted, it was obvious we would not win as many as usual….it turned out that we still outdid the advertiser, but not by the wide margin we normally did. I blame this pettiness on gannett and rupert – they obviously wanted us to do worse than usual. what’s funny is the ’tiser STILL couldn’t beat us.”
Another example of poor professionalism: A boil-over rampage of so-called truths and incomplete facts. We’re gonna get enough of that from DC this year, people!!!!!!
By the way, yes, people actually are gonna criticize a newspaper and its quality of news and its mismanagement. Somehow this is hate? That’s a very strange definition of the word, especially in the BUSINESS WORLD.
Warren Buffet spent $142 million for 63 local newspapers a few days ago. The future is good for local newspapers, but not necessarily for reporters. Unfortunately, most people are not that interested in news. Newspapers might continue to lose money as obituaries and other public notices come to be posted online, but the response might be to simply fire more reporters. Profits will not be effected, and most readers may not notice any changes in the substance of the publication.
I recently asked someone reading the Star Advertiser if he detected any compromise in the quality and/or quantity of the news since the merger. He looked at me puzzled, and said “No, it’s exactly the same. In fact, for me it’s more than enough news as it is.”
It was eye-opening.
“In 1993, Buffett bought a shoe company called Dexter Shoes. Buffett’s investment in Dexter Shoes turned into a disaster because he saw a durable competitive advantage in Dexter that quickly disappeared. According to Buffett, “What I had assessed as durable competitive advantage vanished within a few years.” Buffett claims that this investment was the worst he has ever made, resulting in a loss to shareholders of $3.5 billion.”
Good point.
The person I was talking to was an elderly gent who did not go to college. This might be the primary market for local newspapers.
If that is the case, then local papers are secure in the medium term, about five to 10 years. As revenues decline, these newspapers (as I asserted above) might respond by simply shedding reporters without alienating this older, less educated base of readers. But after the medium term passes, this base too will pass.
One question to ask is how the end of local newspapers would affect local identities and local politics. This is important considering that “All politics is local”.
In his book “Imagined Communities”, the historian Benedict Anderson claimed that nationalism was a product in part of the rise of newspapers with a “national” circulation. For instance, a strong “Lithuanian” identity did not exist until the rise of Lithuanian-language newspapers in New York City among immigrants who, back in the old country, identified primarily with their villages and clans. No newspapers, no identity as such.
As a former Tiserite and current SA-er I really don’t think these awards mean all that much to daily reporters, columnists, graphic artists, page designers, etc. Stick around long enough and you’ll amass a fair share of these lightly contested local awards. Really, they aren’t worth very much, either to one’s resume or one’s fragile sense of self-worth. They certainly didn’t carry any weight when we were all applying for positions after the merger.
Very sadly, you make a good point: the sad old “it’s not who ya know; it’s what ya know” culture is as deeply embedded in newspapers as it is in any industry.
such is business in a small world.
lol — i reversed the “it’s not who ya know; it’s what ya know” !!!!!
now that would be a dream come true for just about every single kid in college right now!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
One article that won an award , “Stimulus Funds Used to Buy Foreign Cars” was so flawed in facts, assumptions, and conclusions that it did not merit publication let alone an award for journalism. See my explanation in the Letters section of The Garden Island today (6/15/12), which I commend the paper for publishing in full.