I’ve been trying to remember how long my wife and I have subscribed to the Sedona Red Rock News. I believe we began around 1980 – years before we moved to Sedona. So, we’ve probably been reading it for about 30 years. Regretfully, when our current subscription expires next March, we will not be renewing it.
Why? The Red Rock News is no longer even trying to separate news from opinion. Let’s take the November 19th above the fold, front page headline: “Two fire board members violate trust of voters.” When a newspaper unjustly defames and vilifies a couple of elected officials –who simply followed established and adopted rules of procedure – it’s gone too far.
Over the past several years, there have been other examples of the Red Rock News indulging in these personal attacks and vendettas, but this, for us at least, was the last straw. In a single-newspaper town, there is always the temptation to abuse the situation because the publisher believes he has a monopoly on the flow of information. Even large cities aren’t immune. Let’s look at what happened to the Los Angeles Times.
In 1989, its last rival for the Los Angeles daily newspaper market, the Los Angeles Herald-Examiner, went out of business, making Los Angeles virtually a one-newspaper city, except for smaller dailies in places like Pasadena, the San Fernando Valley, Santa Monica, Long Beach, Torrance and the South Bay. Subsequently, the Times began to abuse its monopoly and went down the same slippery slope as the Red Rock News: Bias and opinion started replacing fair and balanced reporting. As a consequence, the Times has been consistently losing readers and advertisers. Its daily circulation in October 2010 was 600,449, down from a peak of 1.1 million.
I understand the Red Rock News is experiencing a similar drop in circulation and advertising revenue. I also notice that Section C is no longer being published. Additionally, a variety of alternate news sources are now available, such as www.sedona.biz and (Sedona Times Publishing monthly newspaper) and www.sedona.eye.
So what will eventually happen to the Red Rock News? Will it survive? Or will it go out of business – a victim of its own hubris and arrogance in a changing news media market?
I guess we’ll just have to wait and see.
Craig Dible
Sedona AZ
I could fill a couple of pages describing my own numerous personal problems with the Red Rock News. The issues I had with the Red Rock News all involved the very same arrogance on their part that Mr. Dible mentions, combined with a heapin’ helpin’ of ignorance.
I would have ended my subscription already but, as part of their customer unfriendliness, the Red Rock News will not pro-rate subscription refunds.
Dittos. Let my subscription lapse some time ago. If I want someone’s opinion I will ask for it. No reason to pay for it.
I agree with the above. The Red Rock News has shown that they care more about their own personal opinions that the news. During the past elections, they made sure to be one-sided. They continue to avoid printing notices from those on one side or the other. It is time that everyone stop their subscription and move on. We don’t have a place in this town for this dribble. I stopped my subscription almost a year ago, when it became apparent I could not count on any TRUTH from this paper. The only good use is at the bottom of a birdcage.
The Red Rock News has proven to be extremely liberally biased as are most other forms of news media. However, I was appalled when a seemingly innocent message was sent to several friends and the Red Rock News was inadvertantly included in the e-mailing. The response by the Red Rock News person became hateful with name-calling and the use of the “F” word on their part. I was shocked and immediately cancelled my subscription.
I wish I had written this…Mr. Dible is spot on…..
I think we should all read what is being said by various people about various subjects concerning Sedona. We cannot rely on the RR News for this information. As you are now aware, the RR News is biased in its reporting and won’t publish anything that might be detrimental to its advertisers, nor its agenda. This alternative (Sedona Eye) might be a plausible alternative. It is full of affirmative and dissenting views from a variety of folks in our community. When you have time you will find it interesting to review past discussions and reports about a variety of subjects concerning our community which are available in this site. You might ever want to add your two-cents, as I have.
Having been a victim myself, together with a colleague, of biased reporting, even to the extent that supporting views from others were denied publication, I’ve lived through the frustration and helpless feeling of what I suspect it might be like to take a long hike down the death row corridor.
Having even been refused acceptance of a hand-delivered rebuttal of my own enhanced the desperate need for a vehicle for alternate sources of news. On September 13, 2000, the entire “Our Opinion” portion on a “Commentary” page was comprised entirely of attack articles written not only by the Managing Editor of that paper but embellished by the then Sedona City Manager as well as a high profile member of the city staff. Similar letters appeared on 9/20/2000 and also 10/06/2000.
The denial to publish letters, copies of which had been sent to me, in opposition to what had been made public exemplified, in my opinion, the lowest form of journalism which not only was unjust but served to fuel the flames of even more potentially destructive rumors. What surprised me even more was that sometime later I had people tell me they had to “wonder” about what was printed simply because no one had written in opposition to the editorials. Therein lies the danger of denying the public the opportunity to view the entire picture.
If I learned anything from that experience it was compassion and sadness for those who followed in those torturous footsteps. It remains to be seen if letters expressing a different view from the focused headline will see daylight. Or, possibly, might it be a signal for the publisher of the newspaper wherein the article being scrutinized appears to step up to bat again, a sure indication that yet a new Managing Editor is on the horizon?
Eddie S. Maddock
Many years ago when I was the president of KSB, we had a weekly column that appeared in the RRN with a disclaimer at the bottom that said the views expressed were those of KSB and not of the RRN. One of my columns crossed the view of the RRN, and they discontinued the column.
(The column was about not building a four lane highway on 179. Turns out that ADOT agreed with KSB and not the RRN after a citizens group – The Voice of Choice was formed to oppose the four lane road.)
The replies shown above go a long way to point out the bias of the RRN in their reporting. Hope the RRN listens to its subscribers, or I will joint those who cancel.
Red Rock Snooze is a rehash. Here’s a credit where it is due that the Times last edition covered city and village better and more than the Snooze and or the villager. The last Times edition was much bigger & better & more than election coverage- between Times and web site we knew the history and positions of fire board people & we read about Richardson sooner than any other newspaper. Appreciated NO EDITOR TELLING HIS OPINION HOW TO THINK AND VOTE. Took me a week of coming back to the Times paper a few minutes each morning to read all of it. Can skim the Snooze in under ten minutes in one day and Villager in the time to open my post office box and walk out post office door-that’s why the bins are full of Villager in VOC post office on delivery day- waste of good trees. My wife and coworkers agree. Good real estate article and Halloween story was fun (writer owns Posh Poodle). Your NSA piece by OHalleran was good. Every story had some benefit & we liked all including the Chile miners story. Like the web site and appreciate letting us have this long comment! Two others throwing cents in now; timeshare article was good even though we hate timeshares. AND, galleries need to lower prices to get more business: a piece at (removed by editor) for $4K wasn’t worth $1K at (removed by editor) so get real it’s a new day! THANK YOU. GOOD LUCK. MERRY CHRISTMAS. HAPPY HOLIDAYS.
In response to Bill’s Dec 2, 2010 missive…
Bill, you and KSB as well as The Voice of Choice were woefully wrong going against the advice of ADOT. This two lane road is not much better than the old two lane road. Strange that bunch thought they were smarter than the engineers at ADOT. Your two groups were against the 89A project to Cottonwood too. What does it take for grown men to admit they backed the wrong horse. 179 is a joke…a very expensive joke. However, KSB and VOC can now ride their bikes on the newly built $100 million dollar bike paths.
You claimed a four lane divided highway would decimate our pristine forest, thus you backed the less intrusive two lane divided highway. Do you really think this two lane highway took that much less of the forest? Add about 10 feet in width to this existing newly built road and you have a four lane highway.
I think what you all were thinking was you didn’t want to encourage more tourists and you thought if you lobbied for two lanes instead of four it would have the effect of reducing that tourist traffic. I didn’t want Sedona to become overrun with tourists, timeshares and tomahawk shops either but I certainly wouldn’t have pestered ADOT by accusing them of not having Sedona’s best interest as the basis of their recommended four lane highway. By the way, ADOT didn’t agree with you or the Voice of Choice. They thought you were way off base but finally, after hearing all the baloney the groups threw at them for months on end they decided to ‘let Sedona have their way”. They also said don’t even think of calling us again.
Now, I suppose, your groups want to take over west 89A. ADOT would love nothing better…then they would be free from the kooks who, when it comes to urban planning, have their heads squarely planted…you know where!
I think KSB should stick to picking up trash on the sides of highways 179 and 89A. God knows they need it ( and some decent landscaping). Where are they on that issue?
I for one would like to see a list of the names of all the KSB and VOC members who were active in forcing the two-lane fiasco which is the new highway 179, so we citizens of Sedona can give those people the credit they deserve. I would also like the people to identify themselves when voicing their opinions in this format instead of hiding behind acronyms. If these people only had come out from their hiding places during the city’s incorporation vote Sedona might have remained the quiet friendly town it was in the early 80’s and maybe wouldn’t have turned into the haven for every fortune teller and voodoo peddler in the country.
We all get exactly what we deserve! KSB and VOC have succeeded in having a hand in turning a silk purse into a sows ear. Thanks a bunch for your meddling in Sedona’s affairs. If the “silent majority” out there wasn’t a part of the silent bunch you would hear alot of agreement with my position. Maybe many of us tried to express our opinions but the RRN wouldn’t print our viewpoints. I don’t agree with the RRN’s positions very often but in the case of 179 they were dead right!!!
Well done for posting such a fascinating piece. It’s well thought of and very well written.