http://people.bakersfield.com/home/Blog/soundoff/2529 Sound Off for Jan. 14, 2007 Batch Data Processor | Sunday, Jan 14 2007 3:40 PM Last Updated: Sunday, Jan 14 2007 3:44 PM Reader: The Money section's headline story Tuesday morning on national job creation and unemployment rates was supplemented by a sidebar describing the same kinds of data for Kern County and Bakersfield. You call it the "local angle." I call it the "local slant." Whatever it's called doesn't matter. What does matter is your making the effort to provide readers with information they need within the context of local conditions -- where we live and work. That's very much appreciated. That's what a local newspaper should be doing! Also, I suspect you know only too well that our local economic indicators don't always track with those at the national or even state level. With some regularity, ours seem historically to trail what's happening elsewhere -- usually by several months -- whether the trend is favorable or unfavorable. Business owners need to know and understand that reality -- especially when making decisions based at least in part on such reports and trends. Thanks for taking the initiative to help us see these important distinctions. -- John Pryor, CPCU, ARM, AAI, AIS Jenner: Thanks for the note thanking us for localizing that story, John. Thanks also for previous messages pointing out when we've failed to do so. Your comments help make us better. We know full well that our mission is to cover our community. Each week we run dozens of news stories provided by our wire services. Many of them are amplified or put in context by some reporting by one of our staffers to explain what's happening here or why the story may be particularly relevant to local readers. I regret we aren't always able to provide a local angle to every single story, but we really are making an effort to identify those that need it most. Reader: We moved here from Orange County and in general I find The Bakersfield Californian a very nice paper. My one gripe about the paper is the TV section. It is so user unfriendly. It is just cumbersome. It falls apart. Every other paper in every other city I've ever lived in has always had a booklet. Trying to get through the grid Monday through Friday is a nightmare. It's so bad you even have to explain it. I sent an example of a very nice booklet with my name, address and phone number and never had the courtesy of a reply to see if there wasn't some way you could improve on the TV listings. I would really like to know if there's something you can do to improve the paper that way. It's worth getting the Sunday paper to have the TV section, but it is so darn terrible to have to use I'm just about fed up with it. I might just forget about the Sunday paper and just get the TV Guide. Thank you very much for listening. -- Lori Hobmann Jenner: Thanks for the note. I'm glad you enjoy the paper, and hear your complaints about the TV section loud and clear. Over the years we've struggled with what to do with our TV section. I know many readers long for the smaller, more compact section we once published that was glued, and didn't fall apart. But back when we did that, we had a fraction of the channels we now list, and covered fewer hours than we do now. Many newspapers are abandoning their listings because so many television watchers now get that information from on-screen cable listings or through digital recording services. Even TV Guide has done that. If we were to try to produce a smaller, bound booklet, we'd have to cut many channels and many hours. We'll look again at our listings to see what might be done, but no simple solutions are readily apparent. Reader: My wife and I rely heavily on The Californian's efforts to analyze the merits of election issues and candidates. I like to believe that we do not let The Californian do our thinking for us. It provides balanced analysis including information not available to the average reader. It is always difficult to be an informed voter. We consider your election analysis to be a valuable service. Please continue. Thanks, -- Larry and Sharon Hardgrove Jenner: Thanks for the kind note. We'll do our best to offer a service you and your fellow readers value. Sound Off for Jan. 14, 2007 Batch Data Processor | Sunday, Jan 14 2007 3:40 PM Last Updated: Sunday, Jan 14 2007 3:44 PM Reader: The Money section's headline story Tuesday morning on national job creation and unemployment rates was supplemented by a sidebar describing the same kinds of data for Kern County and Bakersfield. You call it the "local angle." I call it the "local slant." Whatever it's called doesn't matter. What does matter is your making the effort to provide readers with information they need within the context of local conditions -- where we live and work. That's very much appreciated. That's what a local newspaper should be doing! Also, I suspect you know only too well that our local economic indicators don't always track with those at the national or even state level. With some regularity, ours seem historically to trail what's happening elsewhere -- usually by several months -- whether the trend is favorable or unfavorable. Business owners need to know and understand that reality -- especially when making decisions based at least in part on such reports and trends. Thanks for taking the initiative to help us see these important distinctions. -- John Pryor, CPCU, ARM, AAI, AIS Jenner: Thanks for the note thanking us for localizing that story, John. Thanks also for previous messages pointing out when we've failed to do so. Your comments help make us better. We know full well that our mission is to cover our community. Each week we run dozens of news stories provided by our wire services. Many of them are amplified or put in context by some reporting by one of our staffers to explain what's happening here or why the story may be particularly relevant to local readers. I regret we aren't always able to provide a local angle to every single story, but we really are making an effort to identify those that need it most. Reader: We moved here from Orange County and in general I find The Bakersfield Californian a very nice paper. My one gripe about the paper is the TV section. It is so user unfriendly. It is just cumbersome. It falls apart. Every other paper in every other city I've ever lived in has always had a booklet. Trying to get through the grid Monday through Friday is a nightmare. It's so bad you even have to explain it. I sent an example of a very nice booklet with my name, address and phone number and never had the courtesy of a reply to see if there wasn't some way you could improve on the TV listings. I would really like to know if there's something you can do to improve the paper that way. It's worth getting the Sunday paper to have the TV section, but it is so darn terrible to have to use I'm just about fed up with it. I might just forget about the Sunday paper and just get the TV Guide. Thank you very much for listening. -- Lori Hobmann Jenner: Thanks for the note. I'm glad you enjoy the paper, and hear your complaints about the TV section loud and clear. Over the years we've struggled with what to do with our TV section. I know many readers long for the smaller, more compact section we once published that was glued, and didn't fall apart. But back when we did that, we had a fraction of the channels we now list, and covered fewer hours than we do now. Many newspapers are abandoning their listings because so many television watchers now get that information from on-screen cable listings or through digital recording services. Even TV Guide has done that. If we were to try to produce a smaller, bound booklet, we'd have to cut many channels and many hours. We'll look again at our listings to see what might be done, but no simple solutions are readily apparent. Reader: My wife and I rely heavily on The Californian's efforts to analyze the merits of election issues and candidates. I like to believe that we do not let The Californian do our thinking for us. It provides balanced analysis including information not available to the average reader. It is always difficult to be an informed voter. We consider your election analysis to be a valuable service. Please continue. Thanks, -- Larry and Sharon Hardgrove Jenner: Thanks for the kind note. We'll do our best to offer a service you and your fellow readers value. en-us