He noted that The New Yorker is "pretty healthy" as a publication, in terms of revenue and circulation. (As an aside, the magazine is owned by Condé Nast, the higher-profile branch of a media conglomerate that includes the former Ann Arbor News and its newer iteration, AnnArbor.com.) Yet long-form journalism is not enjoying similar good health, Packer said. Every economic and technical trend is moving in the opposite direction, he observed. "It's a battle, but I do continue to believe it's an important form."
The author of several books and a play, Togo RPCV George Packer has been a staff writer for The New Yorker since 2003, and his articles regularly surpass the 10,000-word mark
Monthly Milestone: Election Day Edition
Some thoughts on journalism and democracy
By Mary Morgan
November 2, 2010
Editor's note: The monthly milestone column, which appears on the second day of each month – the anniversary of The Ann Arbor Chronicle's launch – is an opportunity for either the publisher or the editor of The Chronicle to touch base with readers on topics related to this publication. It's also a time that we highlight, with gratitude, our local advertisers, and ask readers to consider making a voluntary subscription to support our work.
[Excerpt]
Some Thoughts from The New Yorker's George Packer
Even before hearing Packer speak, I knew we shared at least two areas of common ground: A formative experience in the Peace Corps (his in Togo, mine in the Central African Republic), and a commitment to long-form journalism.
The author of several books and a play, Packer has been a staff writer for The New Yorker since 2003, and his articles regularly surpass the 10,000-word mark. In that context, The Chronicle's 5,000-word pieces – which some readers find exhausting – seem like picture books.
He noted that The New Yorker is "pretty healthy" as a publication, in terms of revenue and circulation. (As an aside, the magazine is owned by Condé Nast, the higher-profile branch of a media conglomerate that includes the former Ann Arbor News and its newer iteration, AnnArbor.com.) Yet long-form journalism is not enjoying similar good health, Packer said. Every economic and technical trend is moving in the opposite direction, he observed. "It's a battle, but I do continue to believe it's an important form."
Packer also spoke about the importance of news-gathering at the local level. As he's traveled the country to report on stories for The New Yorker, he's noticed a void where local news should be. People are less likely to experience their community through the lens of local reporting – instead, they get their news (and talking points) from national media. That has the effect of homogenizing the country, he contends, saying that "the thing that defines a community is its newspaper, or source of news."
In fact, the decline of news sources was one of three factors Packer cited as contributing to the country's overall decline. The other two, which you could argue are related, are political polarization and economic inequality. When people can't even agree on a common set of facts, he said, that reflects an ailing society and an ailing democracy.
His comments resonated with me. The Chronicle's obstinate commitment to in-depth, fact-based contextual reporting flies in the face of media trends, but is a commitment I believe is crucial to the health of our nation's democracy. Without a reliable source for information about our local government – its actions, and the facts upon which those actions are based – we have no hope of having an informed citizenry, capable of intelligently interacting with our elected and appointed leaders from a position of strength.
I'll share one more observation from Packer's work that struck home. At one point he described some research he'd done for an article on the U.S. Senate. It's a fascinating – though in many ways disturbing – look at how work gets done in Washington, as this very brief excerpt reveals:
The Senate is often referred to as "the world's greatest deliberative body." Jeff Merkley, a freshman Democrat from Oregon, said, "That is a phrase that I wince each time I hear it, because the amount of real deliberation, in terms of exchange of ideas, is so limited." Merkley could remember witnessing only one moment of floor debate between a Republican and a Democrat. "The memory I took with me was: ‘Wow, that's unusual – there's a conversation occurring in which they're making point and counterpoint and challenging each other.' And yet nobody else was in the chamber."
