University of Virginia Library

The Daily Progress

Still, in a policy statement
issued by Mr. Mount and Mr.
Rooker as co-publishers, the paper
announced that "To clarify this
parent corporation relationship we
would point out that it has
absolutely no relationship to the
determination of administration,
news, circulation or advertising
policies in The Daily Progress.
These decisions are locally vested in
us." This contention was made
despite the co-publisher's and the
managing editor's close association
with Worrell Newspapers, Inc.

Two Others Leave

Again according to Mr. Runser,
it was after the promotion of Mr.
Acres and Mr. Kent that two more
key reporters left the Progress. Bob
Wimer, on the education beat, and
Nancy Talmont, who covered
county government, left the paper,
and were soon followed by Ted
McKowen, on the city hall beat; all
of these employees being what Mr.
Runser describes as "very good
reporters."

Mrs. Talmont is on leave of
absence for graduate school, and
has indicated she may return to the
Progress. Mr. Wimer is now working
as the managing editor of The
Amherst New Era Progress and The
Nelson County Times.

By September, Mr. Runser
himself had given notice, as had
Rey Barry, a reporter who covered
the events at the University.

Mr. Runser explained, "A good
paper was not a good paper any
longer. It was just being destroyed.
I think that was the reason most of
the good, experienced people left."

He went on to relate that within
the past few years the Progress had
built itself to where is ad a "very
solid" reporting staff with good
editors on the desks. "All of us
together had tried to put out a
newspaper that had a good balance
between national, international and
local news. We were cutting down
on what we thought of as trivia."

The Newsroom At The Progress' Downtown Office

Former Staffers Replaced With New, Inexperienced Young People

Lindsay Mount

Co-Publisher Of The Progress

Run Everything

He said that on June 21 the
staff was told that all the news
policies that were in effect were
abolished, and from then on there
would be no news policies. The
implication was that they were to
run just about everything that came
in. The staff was instructed to run
more pictures and names of local
people, and told "Don't offend
anyone."

The former city editor goes on
to relate that the new owners
wanted to emphasize advertising, so-reporters
were told to write free
copy for the advertisers. The work
load was further increased when
reporters were forced to double up
and cover more beats. "It made it
impossible for us to concentrate on
the matters of real importance."
"The switch was back to a home
town, folksy kind of paper" Mr.
Runser said.

'Good Positive Things'

"A lot of them (the staff) felt
they could not work under the new
system-there was so little emphasis
on whether we did anything
professionally," he added.

According to an article in The
Richmond Times Dispatch, Mr.
Mount said "The Progress would
emphasize the 'good, positive
things' about the Charlottesville
area with less emphasis on stories
that might 'hurt individuals.' "

In a second RTD article Mr.
Rooker is quoted as having said
that "In the past, research had
shown that most people in
non-metropolitan regions prefer a
newspaper that reports primarily
local happenings." But after the
shift to a locally oriented paper was
met with a predominantly negative
response, he stated "'They certainly
don't want a rural weekly."'

Discontent

In a random sampling of the
opinions of Progress readers the
prevailing sentiment was one of
discontent with the paper as it now
stands, especially in regard to the
legibility of the printing. The
Progress has been installing new
presses, as the accompanying article
explains. One merchant at the
Corner quipped: "When you can
read the print you can see all the
typographical errors."

As for content, another reader
complained: "It's a lot of little
canned articles." Discontent with
the editorials was also voiced; "And
the editorial policy-as far as I'm
concerned they don't even have
one." was the comment of one of
the Progress's younger subscribers.

Karl Runser

Former City Editor

The condemnation is not
uniform, however. One housewife
felt that there were better features
in the Worrell-owned Progress than
in the old paper; her husband said
that he had noticed better writing.
Another female reader said she
would like to see even more local
news than the paper now prints,
perhaps proving that the Progress
might indeed have been able to
make it as a strictly local paper.
Within the past week a new paper,
The Jefferson Journal, has been
published, with the promise of
providing local news on a weekly
basis.

Emphasis Shifts Back

As the Progress stands now it
has made the shift back from its
emphasis on local news to the
original format of giving front page
space to state and national news.
However, it still fills much of its
space with syndicated columns and
wire stories which are less expensive
than running stories written by
Progress staffers.

And, although the staff is
composed of eager, often talented
young people, very few of the
reporters have lived in the
Charlottesville -Albemarle area any
length of time, thus do not have a
great deal of established contacts or
experience in the area. The news
staff is predominantly female, with
University student wives and
students making a sizable part of
the Progress writing force.

Why allow good, experienced
reporters to leave? Mr. Mount says
the reason is simple: "They get up
to where we can't afford them."
Many of the Progress reporters who
have departed are now working on
bigger and better-known papers,
such as the Washington Star and
The Cincinnati Post and Times Star.

Mr. Runser claimed "The old
management was trying to stabilize
the paper. It got good people and
paid them well."

Young Faces

Today someone walking into
the Progress news room might
mistake it for a college newspaper,
with all the young faces that
abound behind the desks. However,
many newspapers are notorious for
hiring young, hard-working staffers,
employing them for severally ears at
nominal salaries, then replacing
them with new reporters when the
more experienced reporters begin
to demand an increase in salary.

Mr. Mount reports that the
Progress circulation is "the highest
it has been in our history." With
only one daily paper in
Charlottesville its citizens seem to
have accepted the changes in the
Progress rather than cancel their
subscriptions. The paper seems to
be trying to give the community
what it wants in the way of the
type of new it emphasizes, but it
does not strive to have those stories
written by staffers with a great deal
of background or experience with
the subject.

Mr. Runser sums up the
situation as follows: "They
consider it a business venture. I
think they are more interested in
the ledger sheet than in providing
thorough news coverage to the
community."

But, then, as the saying goes,
the power (or profit) of the press
belongs to those who own one.