Airing of Grievances

AS A television columnist at the Inquirer, Gail Shister landed interviews that no one else could, she broke stories, and her stuff was picked up by newspapers across the country. She gave the Inky its sole truly national presence. Naturally, the paper's new management saw this as a negative, saying Shister's beat was too focused on broadcast news as they were bumping her down to features writer. Apparently seeking even worse ways to shoot themselves in the foot, Shister's editors have gone further, reassigning her to the metro desk and greatly reducing the chances that the words "as first reported by the Philadelphia Inquirer" will ever appear in print again. Meanwhile, Shister's colleague, Jonathan Storm, is permitted to file this kind of whiny dreck, from this summer's Television Critics Association meeting in Beverly Hills:

Most critics love using TV terms in a semi-annual, nearly three-week gathering that is as much like summer camp as anything in real life, but not because it's fun. The grueling schedule can wear down the most energetic writer, but what's known as the Press Tour can be rewarding for the way it allows people with the same consuming interest (many of whom are good friends) to gather from scattered parts of North America.

Dude gets paid to watch TV and all he can do is complain about being flown to California to talk with actors and producers. Jonny, brother, it could be worse: You could be writing about house fires in Kensington.

Comments

[Bill]

I could not agree more TD. Gail was great and that column was must read. They have now ruined that section of the paper, as usual a bad decision by the Inky. UGGH!

[Tom Goodman]

I read Shister infrequenly so I cannot comment on her work but I can comment on the demise of the Inquirer and the clear message being sent to its writers: accept reassignment or don't let the door hit you.... One instance we are all familiar with is Dan Rubin, whose Metro columns have none of the energy or irreverence of Blinq. The Inquirer is fast becoming unnecessary. It now runs a summary HORIZONTALLY on the back page of one section (Sports??) which doesn't bode well for the future unless, of course, the owners wants its future to be closer to the give-away Metro than a legitimate big city daily. Imagine running something across the back of a newspaper horizontally. Try holding that on a subway. Tierney has a history of ruining every business he gets his hands on (a track record not to be confused with making money on his investments) and the Inquirer is well on its way to joining that list.