SOUND OFF
| Saturday, Aug 29 2009 10:20 PM
Last Updated Saturday, Aug 29 2009 10:22 PM
Loading Stories
Advertisement
Reader: I have three complaints about the tabloid format:
1. It's too bulky and it slips apart.
2. I hate the upside-down classifieds.
3. The crosswords should always be at the outside edge of a page so it can be folded in half without removing the entire two-page spread.
I fully understand innovation and costs and support your efforts and hope you'll really place the crosswords as I suggested and please no teeny puzzles.
Thanks a bunch.
-- Gerry Baker
Reader: For several reasons I don't care for your new format. How much extra would it have cost each subscriber to maintain the old format? I guess that that was not an option.
We have a Californian box by our rural mailbox, and the paper is folded multiple times, held with a rubber band and placed in the box. Try straightening out that after it has been in your box for a few hours. It is a real challenge.
Also miss the separate sections. I understand why it cannot be done in the present format, and I also read today's column regarding the paper. I've attempted to be brief and to the point. I appreciate your time.
-- Tom Crandall
Reader: What a pleasant surprise to have your great paper formatted in sections on the weekend! Thank you.
My husband could take his Sports page to the library and I could peruse the Local and Eye Street sections at my leisure.
I almost missed the "Eye Section" last Thursday. When I remembered not seeing it, I had to hunt for it feverishly before it got put into the blue can. I love today's format.
Thank you.
-- Alice Reis
Reader: For what it's worth I like the new paper just fine. It might be a little heavy for women to read straight through without taking it apart.
What I would like to see is the print a bit larger! Make a lot of old people like myself real happy. It would make separating the bull from the truth a bit easier.
Thanks.
-- Arlie Chambless
Reader: Well, I kept an open mind about the change of format for The Californian. I've reached a conclusion after this past week and weekend. It's not good.
I'm sorry to say, but I think the decision to go with this extremely reduced format is a mistake and hopefully it will be improved on in the future.
A simple thing like having the classifieds as a pull-out section would help reduce spousal tension at the breakfast table.
Also, I've noticed that there were no pictures from Casey Christie all week. I hope he's still with The Californian as many people enjoy his photos.
Plus, where's Herb Benham?
I understand that times are tough for the newspaper business. But I think these cutbacks are a little too drastic and may result in more people canceling the paper (hopefully not because I want you guys to stay in business!).
Take care,
-- Sharon Davis
Reader: This is a short note to tell you how much I am enjoying the new format of The Californian.
Change IS hard for many people. I'm sure you've had your share of grumblers, but I think you definitely have a winner. Strangely, I find myself spending more time with the morning paper, which I am enjoying immensely!
Keep up the great work - and I plan to keep on reading.
Many thanks,
-- Chris Bennett
Jenner: We continue to hear from readers about our change to a smaller, tabloid format on weekdays.
While many have complained, quite a few have called to tell us they like the new format. Those who don't most commonly cite the lack of sections.
To one frequently asked question -- can we please just change it back the way it was -- let me assure you we didn't make this change without a lot of thought and planning, and we're not likely to change it back without the same thought, research and reflection.
We have received many ideas and suggestions regarding how we might improve the paper. We truly do appreciate all these suggestions and will thoroughly consider every thoughtful idea. I can't promise we'll try them all, but we really do want to produce a paper our readers want to read.
I also want to thank all the readers who wrote or called. Even the vast majority of those who have said they don't like the change have offered their support and encouragement.
P.S. -- Casey and Herb were on vacation; they are still with us.
n n n
Reader: Sunday the 23rd's paper said the temperature would be 81 degrees. Monday's paper said it was 97.
What happened? A big typo or did you hire Miles Mistakeo?
-- Bob McClure
Jenner: No, but we did miss that one by a mile.
n n n
Reader: I wanted to thank The Californian for including the Volunteer Center of Kern County in a weekly feature "Upcoming Volunteer Opportunities."
I was contacted by government editor Christine Bedell in regard to volunteer trends in Kern County and California recently and while talking with her I mentioned that in past years we were featured in a weekly Volunteer Opportunities feature.
We have missed having the ability to recruit volunteers for our local non-profit agencies in that manner and are so thrilled to have that ability again.
The first feature appeared on Sunday, Aug. 9, with an amazing article on "volunteerism" and after that it has been featured on Fridays. I can not tell you the INCREDIBLE response that it has generated in this community.
Agencies that have experienced DRASTIC funding cuts, forcing the elimination of staff and programs, are elated to have their "need" for volunteers appear in the paper. With the economy, these agencies are having to do much more in our community with much less in resources.
The response has been remarkable and really is aiding in "lightening" the load on many executive directors' and volunteer coordinators' shoulders at a very difficult time. Agencies have literally lined up for a chance at being able to participate.
Thank you for partnering with the Volunteer Center of Kern County and other nonprofit organizations in striving to meet the needs of the community that we ALL serve. You have supported the Volunteer Center for many years through quality reporting of volunteer efforts within Kern County. Thank you again for the continued support.
-- Brenda Ratliff
Executive Director
Volunteer Center of Kern County
n n n
Reader: On August 24, Inga Barks advocated the torture of terror suspects on her talk radio show, which airs on KERN AM 1180. I applaud her for exercising her First Amendment rights. Now, I'll exercise mine.
As long as she is associated with KERN and The Californian, I won't buy the paper, listen to the station, or purchase goods or services from their advertisers.
-- Kevin J. Montgomery
Jenner: And I'm happy to help you exercise your right to free speech by publishing your letter.
And you certainly are free to not read the paper or our website.
We have always believed the newspaper should publish a broad spectrum of points of view and ideas.
Former Supreme Court Justice Potter Stewart once wrote: "The function of free speech under our system of government is to invite dispute. It may indeed best serve its high purpose when it induces a condition of unrest, creates dissatisfaction with things as they are, or even stirs people to anger."
We know the ideas, comments and opinions we print often irritate many readers, but we believe offering a broad range of views is a part of our responsibility as a newspaper.
n n n
Reader: It appears to me that the article on the front page, "Obama's 'Big Bang' backfiring" by Mike Allen and Jim Vandehei, is more of an opinion piece than a news article. I think it belongs in another part of the paper.
Please put opinion pieces on the Opinion page, not on the front page.
-- Judy Reynolds
Jenner: That story, written by two of Politico.com's top reporters, was an in-depth analysis of Obama's ambitious legislative strategy. It was based on interviews with political insiders both inside and outside the administration. I thought it was insightful and well-reported, and belonged on a news page.
n n n
Reader: I have recently started cutting out all of The Californian articles concerning health care. By and large the biggest bonanza is Aug. 23 with four in-depth articles:1) Dr. Patel's letter; 2) Robert Price's Opinion; 3) Linda Schrom's letter to the editor; 4) Paul Combs' Sunday Forum letter.
The Aug. 16 "Fact Or Fiction" article was a good start, but each issue could be the basis for some more insight. The Aug. 16 "Big Pharma" by Robert Reich indicates "the White House confirmed it has promised Big Pharma that any legislation will bar the government from using its huge purchasing power to negotiate lower drug prices."
I encourage The Californian to jump into the mix by assigning one of your top writers to clearly represent the issues involved in the health care legislation.
-- John Karnes
Jenner: Thanks for the note. A number of our staffers have been involved in writing stories on local angles, and we'll continue to do that. It makes the most sense to focus our staff reporting resources on local aspects of the story.
Meanwhile, our editors have built such packages as the "Fact or Fiction" presentation and have reached out to get op-ed pieces from local health care experts and such folks as Robert Reich. We'll continue to ask our staff to come up with thoughtful ways to educate our readers.
