THE VIRGINIAN-PILOT
Copyright (c) 1995, Landmark Communications, Inc.
DATE: Sunday, October 8, 1995 TAG: 9510070001
SECTION: COMMENTARY PAGE: J5 EDITION: FINAL
SOURCE: LYNN FEIGENBAUM
LENGTH: Medium: 87 lines
Ladies and gentlemen of the jury, what is your verdict on coverage of the O.J. Simpson trial?
No, I didn't pose that question, but dozens of Virginian-Pilot readers pronounced judgment anyway. And no question, it was a hung jury. There was praise and condemnation, anger and relief, frustration and gratitude.
I don't know how the real jurors did it. Like most Americans, I watched the trial's denouement on TV, then stuffed myself full of post-verdict analyses. Ours, I thought, were pretty darn good.
But I'm less than thrilled to concede that the Simpson trial was THE U.S. news story of the year. At least, it was Numero Uno if you measured it in terms of newsprint consumption and Nielsen ratings.
The Pilot joined the O.J. fervor. While there was no Hampton Roads connection per se, nearly half the staff - writers, editors, photographers - were pulled off regular assignments to get a local spin on Tuesday's verdict or compile the mountain of incoming wire copy.
The result Wednesday was 8 1/2 pages of Simpson trial coverage, not including a related cover story in The Daily Break.
That was about 7 1/2 pages too much for some readers. ``I think the people here are sick of it,'' said Robert Stovall of Portsmouth. ``. . . You all went over the same thing we've heard over the last nine months.''
Robert James of Norfolk thought the post-verdict coverage was fine but not worth an entire front page. There were other things going on - Pope John Paul II's visit to the United States, a Navy helicopter crash.
But John Simanton, a frequent critic, gave the Pilot's O.J. coverage an unqualified thumbs up for ``journalism that was absolutely first class.'' He added: ``It was crystal clear that the staff of the paper had planned meticulously for the announcement and swung into action instantly as soon as the news came out.''
Indeed, the delayed verdict, set for 1 p.m. EDT Tuesday, allowed the media to get all its ducks in a row. But the timing was no coup for morning newspapers. By the time they landed at front doors Wednesday, the news was already some 16 hours old and had been replayed on CNN a thousand times, or so it seemed.
Thus, O.J.-weary readers probably would have complained had the Pilot run only a single front-page story, and not an enormous package topped off by a 3-inch-deep banner, ``A FREE MAN,'' that O.J. probably could have read from Los Angeles.
The Pilot's ``jurors'' naturally had something to say about that.
``If the Russians had landed at Cape Henry, the headline would not have been bigger,'' said one woman.
Others picked on the choice of words. Dick Alberts of Norfolk felt it should have read, ``A guilty man went free,'' while Iris MacDonald of Norfolk would have preferred something non-judgmental like ``Simpson found not guilty.'' To say ``A free man,'' she said, implies that he was guilty but got away with it.
Some callers simply wanted to sound off on the verdict. Others scolded one or all of the five Pilot columnists who weighed in on the verdict. Personally, I liked hearing the paper's familiar voices speak out from their own particular points of view. But several readers felt they were too harsh on O.J.
And so it went. A hung jury, as I said.
We all know how The Virginian-Pilot covered the Simpson verdict. Here's a look at what some other papers did on Wednesday:
The Richmond Times-Dispatch banner declared ``Not guilty'' (in quotes). Two inside news pages, and some section fronts, were devoted to the trial but there were other stories on its front page.
The Daily Press, in Newport News and Hampton, also bannered ``Not guilty'' - without the quotes. The front page was primarily O.J., along with three inside pages
USA Today used most of its front page for the trial, plus 5 1/2 inside pages. The banner headline: ``SIMPSON FREE.''
The rival Washington Post and Washington Times were among some 40 U.S. papers that put out special, post-verdict editions. Both also had eight-page sections Wednesday, but the Times won for longest headline: ``Simpson acquitted, returns to estate in swift conclusion to courtroom epic.''
That's just five newspapers. Add up all those O.J. pages, multiply by their circulation, and there go a whole lot of trees!
Lynne Glaser, ombudsman at The Fresno Bee in California, said readers snapped up the paper's 5,000 or so O.J. ``extras,'' the newspaper's first special edition since Pearl Harbor.
Obviously, America wants to read this stuff. Alas, that's one verdict probably no one can second-guess.
by CNB