The downward view from Olympus

Abstract

The issue debated at a Ditcbley Foundation conference in February this year was deceptively simple: what future is there for quality newspapers? Aside from the semantic argument over the definition of quality, a clear division soon emerged. In broad terms it split the American (and German) contingent from the British. The Americans accused the British of debasing the concept of a serious, quality press. The Brit broadsheets were partisan and, by extension, had abandoned veracity; they were too ideological, too personalised and too trivial; comment intruded into news reporting. In short, to use the phrase which recurred throughout, the British press was guilty of "dumbing domn."

The British responded by pointing out the differences between the USA and Britain: diversity of titles, intense and continuous competition for readers and lack of profitabilaty of almost all serious papers. There were also profound cultural differences which meant that the two sets of audiences have diverse expectations. Some of the Brits thought American papers bland, boring and elitist, deciding what their readers should read.

The BJR has invited two of the protagonists from either side of the Atlantic to write about their differing approaches to quality journalism: Robert Kaiser, Managing Editor of The Washington Post, and Peter Stothard, Editor of The Times.