This Michael Kinsley critique of newspaper writing will be fascinating to anyone with a passion for news.  Kinsley’s argument that the prints desperately need  to update their presentation of the news has me wondering: When was the last time we seriously thought about whether radio news is truly serving the wants/needs of today’s listeners?

A couple examples:

- We continue to insist that actualities are critical to newscasts.  But are they, really?  Soundbites from politicians, city officials, witnesses, et al, seldom add to the listener’s understanding of the story, and take up time that might be better used to deliver another item.  Remember, Paul Harvey never used sound.

-  Given what we’ve learned from PPM about listener tune-in, should every talk radio station in the market present news at the top and bottom?  How about, oh, say, 20and 5o?

- Is our story selection up to snuff?  How many stories still get done just because the anchor’s mind was strapped into a straightjacket by a journalism school teacher who hasn’t been in a radio station since 1979?  (Answer: Way too many.)

With radio in survival mode, it’s not realistic to expect the issue of newscast quality to get much industry-wide attention.  But listen to your own station’s newscasts over the next few days with fresh ears and I bet you hear at least a couple things that could use a re-think.