| Topics: Civic Communication The Charlotte Observer, continued Index Taking Back Our Neighborhoods
Education
Your Voice in North Carolina
Freedom Park Conversations
Your Vote in '92 Contents Your Voice in North Carolina Your Voice in North Carolina Weeks before the 1993 legislative session, the paper polled Charlotte residents and queried legislators about which issues each considered pressing. Poll results and a summary of answers from 82 of 170 legislators showed agreement on education, health care, children and crime were priorities; however, citizens were more willing to spend than legislators, and the two groups diverged on the fifth issue. (Legislators said jobs; citizens said government integrity.) Through the session, the paper highlighted issues, regularly publishing a graded progress chart; a weekly column outlining the coming committee topics, with legislative phone numbers; citizen questions, drawn from follow-up calls to poll respondents; and pro-con features highlighting citizen opinions. In 1994, when the legislature held an off-year budget review and a special session on crime, "citizens agenda" coverage was more sporadic, and no poll was commissioned. A case study by Project on Public Life and the Press New York University Department of Journalism 10 Washington Pl. New York, NY 10003 (212) 998-3793 © Project on Public Life and the Press,1994 The Project is funded by a grant from the John S. and James L. Knight Foundation. Charlotte Observer (newspaper)
P.O. Box 32188
Charlotte, NC 28232
(704) 358-3070 (phone)
(704) 358-5036 (fax) Ownership
Knight-Ridder
No. newsroom employees: 240 Circulation
232,000 (daily)
298,000 (Sunday)
Circulation Area (pop.)
13-county Charlotte metro area (1.6 million) Initiative
Taking Back Our Neighborhoods Date:
June 1994-December 1994 Lead Editor:
Rick Thames, metro editor Executive in charge
(if different from above):
Jennie Buckner, executive editor When and how did this initiative get started?
It was an attempt to apply to state government lessons of the Observer's 1992 presidential election coverage, which focused on a "citizens agenda." What are the goals of the initiative?
To explicitly seek out and keep an editorial focus on a legislative agenda important to citizens. What does the initiative entail?
The poll, a two-Sunday report on its results, and consistent follow-up coverage. In every legislative story, reporters quoted citizens who had been polled and agreed to answer follow-up queries. Readers also were encouraged to call in questions to the paper's response line and to contact lawmakers with their views. How many people are working on it?
The two reporters assigned to the paper's bureau in Raleigh, Government Editor Drescher, and occasionally a reporter in Charlotte. What does it look like in the newspaper?
Initial package with results ran on 1A. Results of the legislative poll ran with list of lawmakers who did and did not respond. All coverage was identified with a "Your Voice in North Carolina" sig. Legislative phone numbers were consistently highlighted on 1A, on section fronts and in stories and columns. Pro-con issue boxes ran with names and photos of citizen respondents who took varying positions; boxes also told who to contact in the legislature about the issue. Response to the Initiative In the newsroom:
Reaction from staff was fairly neutral to positive. People thought the approach was good, but there was little involvement from staff beyond the capital bureau. On the heels of the presidential campaign coverage involving virtually every newsroom staff member, legislative coverage was limited. Elements incorporated into regular newsroom routines and/or culture:
In a marked break from previous legislative coverage, every story featured a citizen voice. Response In the community:
Complaints about bias in legislative coverage stopped cold. In previous years, some readers had complained that the Observer "was following its usual liberal agenda." The governor and members of the legislature reported substantially increased call volume, particularly after a given issue was highlighted. Other community response information is fairly anecdotal, but the change did move one area CEO to write a letter to the publisher saying the coverage was very helpful, particularly the weekly column tracking the week's legislative agenda and giving names and phone numbers of the legislators on the committees involved. Among political leaders:
Initially, legislators were wary about filling out surveys, worried that the paper would return at the end of the session to compare votes with intentions; however, the Observer never published individual breakdowns of the survey results. As coverage continued, legislators seemed to have a better understanding of what drove coverage than they had in the past, recognizing that the paper was tracking citizen concerns. Overall lessons - successes and failures:
Drescher believes the coverage established a substantial link between readers and the paper and between readers and their government. Keeping the citizens' voices in the paper was the most difficult element. Because polls were conducted well in advance of the session, it was sometimes hard to find respondents who had sustained an interest in the issue and who had followed the issue through the legislative session. What's next:
The paper took a similar approach on coverage of November local elections, polling readers to set an agenda, tracking their priority issues with candidates and publishing candidate responses to citizen questions. However, local government coverage still does not involve readers as substantially as state coverage. At the state level, the paper expects to follow a similar coverage track in the next legislative session. Case study written by Lisa Austin, Assistant Director of the Project on Public Life and the Press, July 1994. Lisa is also a member of the CPN Journalism editorial team. More Information Project on Public Life and the Press
New York University
Department of Journalism
10 Washington Pl.
New York, NY 10003
(212) 998-3793 Index Taking Back Our Neighborhoods
Education
Your Voice in North Carolina
Freedom Park Conversations
Your Vote in '92 Back to Communication Index | 
