When the unions walked out on November 2, Brewer, a member of the San Francisco
Newspaper Guild, went with them. The only members of the "Voice of the Voter" team
left in the newsroom were senior managers such as Rosenheim. The strikers produced a
newspaper of their own, but they could not and would not espouse any projects viewed
as property of the Chronicle.
"It wasn't ours. It was theirs," Brewer said. "We didn't take the database. We didn't
even take our pencils. We had nothing."
KRON and KQED continued plugging along with election coverage. KRON brought in the
Chronicle's Yoachum for its "Voice of the Voter Guide to Decision
'94" program.
KQED, which had prepared another series of half-hour special reports on major issues,
ran a sixth half-hour November 4 as an preview for the November 8 election. Each of
the KQED specials aired twice in the late afternoon and was preceded by a
Forum
discussion in the morning; the specials were distributed via satellite to other
California public radio stations.
Despite their efforts, "Voice of the Voter" was overshadowed by the strike and the
horse race. By November 14, when the strikers returned to work after a bitter two
weeks on the picket line, "Voice of the Voter" was yesterday's news.
Measuring Success
Did the project accomplish anything?
Chronicle executive editor Wilson isn't sure. "We added something. I'm
not sure we
added enough or that we added it successfully. We were better at getting voices of the
public in the paper in ways we had not done before. It's hard to assess the value of
that."
KRON's Owen called the failure to reach beyond a select few staffers "a personal
frustration of mine." But, she said, "Realizing that we struck a chord, not only with
our viewers but also with the candidates, has made an impact in both our shops."
"How do you measure success?" asked KQED's Eisele. "Did we do more issues-oriented
political coverage? Did we help educate more people? Did we influence the way people
voted? Did we want to?"
One measure could be volume. KQED produced approximately 25 hours of programming
during "Voice of the Voter." Some of the programming would have been a part of
traditional election coverage, but the bulk resulted from participation in the
NPR-Poynter Election Project.
Another measure was the thousands of readers, listeners, and viewers who
participated by attending forums, watching or listening to the broadcasts, and
commenting through letters, calls, and e-mail.
The Chronicle published nearly 100 stories under the "Voice of the
Voter" banner; its
greatest success may have been the voter-registration drive.
KRON succeeded by keeping a focus on issues despite the fevered pitch of California
politics.
The easiest success to quantify was the partnership itself. No one could foresee the
chemistry that, in Yoachum's words, just "clicked." Wary of the collaboration at
first, she was thrilled by the results. "To realize you could work with them and not
be co-opted or not co-opt them. I had never realized that you could partner with other
elements of the media like that."
Eisele agreed. "We had more visibility and more influence because we were a
partnership. But one of the most gratifying elements was watching the way it evolved,
the way it grew as we came up with ideas and employed them."
The designers of the NPR-Poynter Election Project wanted journalists to realize the
potential in covering elections as partners. The San Francisco partners did just
that.
More than a year after "Voice of the Voter" began, they are examining ways to continue
the partnership and to integrate some of the elements into other kinds of coverage,
including the mayor's race and the 1996 presidential campaign.
"I want people in the industry to know this thing has legs," Brewer said. He also
wants them to know it takes commitment. "There's a very strong commitment of person
power that has to be given. Community-oriented journalism takes a lot of extra time
and dedication, particularly if you have a tight budget or staffing problems. You
can't just go in, hold a confab, and beat it."
Yoachum's attitude continues to evolve. "I still maintain it's a crock to say we're
in a partnership with our readers. There are lots of reasons why people come to us,
not the least of which is we provide a service. I think community journalism carries
some inherent risks. Clearly we have to do something differently, but that can't be a
sellout."
Can that be done?
"I can't believe I'm going to say this--I would be disappointed if we don't continue
it in some fashion. We struck a chord."