The nation's newspaper publishers on Tuesday watched videotaped interviews with Americans who say they don't read newspapers very much, then debated how to change that. An advertising consultant advised the publishers to adopt a more local focus, suggesting that international issues such as the push for independence in Lithuania don't sell advertising. A publisher countered that newspapers still reach a larger audience than any other news medium. The comments were made during a panel discussion at the American Newspaper Publishers Association 104th annual convention. The discussion, moderated by Jeff Greenfield of ABC News, was called ``Ozzie and Harriet Are Gone _ Who Do You Think You're Writing For?'' Virginia Dodge Fielder, vice president of research for Knight-Ridder Inc., expressed industry frustration in trying to pinpoint the cause of declining readership. ``I wish people hated us more,'' she said. ``I wish they expressed more dissatisfaction because if they did we'd know how to tackle it. ... What the public is saying is not `I hate you' but `I don't need you. You're a great electric company, but I live in an all-gas house.''' The session opened with videotaped interviews in which subjects were asked if they read a newspaper. ``I don't have time,'' was a common response. Several said that TV news was ``easier.'' One man said he felt less connected to his local newspaper since big business had taken it over. The comment echoed a message emphasized by Laurel Cutler, vice chairman of FCB-Leber Katz partners and vice president of consumer affairs for the Chrysler Corp. ``The only specialized thing about a newspaper is its locality,'' she told the audience. Localness is what you have to sell. That's why USA Today is a very peculiar animal. I guess it's the local newspaper for people on airlines.'' Frank A. Daniels Jr., president and publisher of The News & Observer of Raleigh, N.C., interjected that ``a newspaper traditionally has been a smorgasbord. You have something in there for everybody.'' But Ms. Cutler warned against newspapers trying to be ``all things to all people'' and suggested specialization was more appealing to advertisers. ``The more generalized, the more all things to all people, the less we care about you,'' she said. Daniels suggested that newspapers might have to follow the lead of American Express, which created different categories of cards for different income brackets. He noted that a newspaper subscription is costly and perhaps different price brackets for different incomes would encourage more readership. ``How do we create a platinum card newspaper?'' he asked. Greenfield suggested that the puzzle of declining readership may not be complex. ``Is it possible that the reason people read newspapers so devotedly in 1940 is there was nothing else to inform them?'' he asked. ``And maybe this age of newspapers is like the buggy whip manufacturers in 1910.'' Publishers and editors on the panel disagreed. ``One thing you may be overlooking is how adaptable newspapers are,'' said C. Shelby Coffey III, editor and executive vice president of the Los Angeles Times. He noted that the Times has numerous regional bureaus to keep the paper local but has inaugurated a new ``World Report'' section to emphasize global developments. ``Research at the Times shows that international news is of great interest to readers,'' he said. Coffey and Gerald Garcia, editor and publisher of The Knoxville (Tenn.) Journal, also urged development of a multi-ethnic reporting force to keep up with interests of a diverse reading audience. Coffey called it ``the polycultural newsroom.'' Consultant Ronald Brown, president of Banks, Brown Inc. of San Francisco, noted that the interests of that city's Chinese-Americn population are underrepresented in its newspapers All panelists agreed that improved education would improve readership of newspapers.
