The push and pull of this horrific acid hoax story has put The Columbian in the middle of the cross hairs … again.
Welcome to our world.
When we did our story questioning if the whole thing might have been a hoax — before Bethany Storro admitted to it — we were read the riot act by many readers.
“Lou, your team deserves the prize for the most ridiculous theory of the year. Does anyone at the Columbian actually think about what they are writing?
“Or are you just hoping that if you lower your standards low enough you might get some tabloid readers to subscribe?”
Our Storro coverage has continued — mostly on our front pages — and now we’re hearing about that as well. And very little of it is good.
“Searching” writes on our website: “Is this the story that won’t die?!? For crying out loud, LET … IT … GO! I’m sick and tired of hearing about this young lady … Don’t your reporters have any other (and more interesting) stories to cover?”
One of my favorite posters, “Goldenoldie,” said this a little after 8 a.m. Wednesday as we began posting items leading up to Storro’s court hearing that day:
“Forget it. I’m not going to even bother reading any more about Ms. Storro. I can read more in the Enquirer if I have to. Sheese.”
A few hours later “Goldenoldie” was back, commenting on our Storro stories.
Have we done too much?
So with all these negative vibes, could it be true that very few people are interested in the Storro story?
First, I should say a small minority has supported our stories.
Common Sense wrote:
“Dear Columbian, keep this story coming! At the end of the year the Storro (story) will be one of the top 10 stories for Vancouver for 2010, like it or not folks. And for all the readers who claim that they do not like hearing about this story anymore but read every word about it, and post and post and to boot …”
Today, unlike in the good ol’ days, it’s actually possible to gauge interest by seeing how many folks are clicking on specific stories on our website. So I asked our Web editor to run a report on the Storro story we did last Sunday. It was this Sunday story that turned the trickle of “no more Storro stories” into a cascade.
Well, for the entire weekend, that Storro story was the No. 1 read story on our website. I also asked our circulation director if the Storro stories moved the meter at all for our sales of printed Columbians.
He said he felt it had.
Extra sales a bad thing?
Speaking of sales, when we do a story like this we also hear:
“You guys are just doing these stories to sell more papers!”
I am always befuddled and a little bemused by this comment. Take newspapers out of the equation for a second and put any other business in its place. Say you’re a baker and you decided to put more honey in your honey biscuits and then you moved them to the front of the bakery. Has the baker ever heard this comment?
“You guys are just doing this to sell more biscuits!”
As Goldenoldie would say, sheese!
If it’s a crime to give readers something that they’re interested in … then, your honor, I plead guilty.
Look, I suspect the Storro story is winding down. But what we’ve done so far, in my view, has been fair and legitimate.
But I’d by lying if I said the stories are over. So if you hate ’em, please move on to something else in the paper. There’s plenty there.
If you love ’em? Stay tuned.
Lou Brancaccio is The Columbian’s editor. Reach him at 360-735-4505 or lou.brancaccio@columbian.com.
