From the Editor: What — and who — shapes a front page
Not surprisingly, we expend more time and conversation in determining the contents and look of the front page of the newspaper every day than any other page.
We have a whole meeting devoted to that task each afternoon with as many as a dozen people involved — senior editors, designers, opinion, wire, sports and photo editors and me — for the sole purpose of deciding which stories rise to the top and how they fit together to provide you a best-of look at the news of the day.
It's where a variety of viewpoints are taken into consideration. Sometimes, everyone in the room will share a similar vision of what it ought to be. Sometimes we have spirited discussions. But we welcome that because it might reveal blind spots in our thinking. But by the end of the meeting, it's Managing Editor Lisa Miner or me who makes the final decision on what goes where, how big we play a particular story, what sorts of images we use.
And then we cross our fingers that things don't change dramatically into the evening, which they often do.
The Page 1 meeting is where it all comes together for the editor of a newspaper, and it's hands down my favorite part of the day. It defines the spirit of who we are.
From my discussions with readers, it's clear to me that not everyone understands the amount of independence, conscientiousness and concern for balance and appropriateness that goes into the making of our front page. It is the input of people with diverse points of view that help shape it. It's not just my thoughts or Lisa's. It's not some mysterious guiding hand from up the corporate ladder or the influence of a political force.
I wouldn't have spent 40 years at this company if that sort of nonsense were at play. I certainly wouldn't be managing a department in that sort of environment.
Opinion Editor Jim Slusher received an email on Wednesday asking, simply, “Why does the DH devote only 2 pages to Trump?”
One might assume he is not a supporter of Trump. But it's hard to tell. Trump revels in coverage, no matter what it is.
Trump's day-to-day actions as president routinely ended up on the front page in a way Obama's did not because there was nothing routine about Trump's presidency.
During his presidency, I would receive emails from readers begging for me to pledge Trump-free days, because they were sick of the coverage.
But our coverage of Donald Trump or anyone else is not dictated by how much anyone happens to like him or hate him. It's the impact of his words and actions that are the determinant.
I've heard complaints when we've essentially turned the entire front page over to news of Trump. If memory serves, we did that for both of his impeachments. And we've gone pretty big for his three separate indictments.
We blew out Bill Clinton's impeachment, too.
We don't build the front page to illustrate our glee with the news — merely its impact on us.
When the federal building in Oklahoma City was blown up, it's all we put on the front page. When terrorists flew planes into buildings on Sept. 11, 2001, it's all we wrote about. When the Cubs won the World Series, that was our front page.
OK, I'll admit to a little glee there.
But the position of a story, it's length and the absence of other stuff on Page 1 on any given day speaks not to whether we're excited to see another indictment or we're shocked at the human cruelty of a mass killing but rather how that news of the day fits into our lives.