The departure of Andy Bromage as news editor of Seven Days, everybody’s favorite “alternative” newspaper, creates a decisive moment for the future of the paper. At least I think so. And I shall explain…

When Bromage was shifted from “Fair Game” columnist to news editor, and Paul Heintz ensconced in the Peter Freyne Memorial Chair, I saw the potential for the paper to become a real force in Vermont political journalism, possibly on the same level as VTDigger. But that potential has only been sporadically realized. For every hard-hitting story on a subject no one else has touched (see Ken Picard’s recent piece on Vermont’s terrible wastewater treatment and reporting system), there’s been even more irrelevant, tangential stuff and (often ill-considered) attempts at being edgy or different (Heintz’ notorious piece on huntin’ with the Guv).  

During the most recent legislative session, Seven Days too often forswore coverage of issues under the Golden Dome — or presented them solely in horse-race form, rather than exploring the real merits of the issue. The paper’s political coverage often strayed to our D.C. delegation, something better done when the legislature is in adjournment.

The edginess, which used to have a real bite during the days of Peter Freyne and Shay Totten, is usually confined to the occasional expletive or Heintz’ habit of recycling Freyne’s old nicknames, like Ho-Ho and Ol’ Bernardo. He can deploy Freynisms, but has he ever created a nickname of his own for a current politico? I can’t recall any.

And there have been complete misfires, such as the “series” called “Kill This Bill,” which was itself killed after one unfortunate installment in which Bromage bemoaned the Legislature’s wasting its time on ceremonial bills to create the Official State Something-or-Other.

Yeah, real groundbreaking stuff.

Not to say that Seven Days is a journalistic dry hole. They often produce really admirable journalism. But that only makes the fluff and ersatz edginess even more annoying.

And, with talented reporters like Heintz, Bromage, Picard, and Kathryn Flagg, I’d expect them to consistently produce top-quality stuff.

But too often they don’t. They fail to fulfill their potential.

What’s wrong over there? I’m purely an outsider; I trade barbs, usually good-natured, with Heintz, and I had a beer with Bromage once. Never met the co-owners. But from my perspective as a reader, it looks like an institution in the grips of a midlife crisis. The paper isn’t sure what it wants to be.

Or should I say, its owners aren’t sure what they want it to be. Not that I know them… but it’s their paper, and their vision. Or lack thereof.

Seven Days is an established institution. From the look of the ad-stuffed paper edition and the healthy roster of reporters, I infer that it’s a financial success. It’s been around long enough to have a place in Vermont’s power structure. And, perhaps, to fear the loss of its place should it offend the wrong people too often.

So maybe they pull back the reins on political coverage, or try to create “balance,” ugh. The result is inconsistency, false edginess, and a blandness that can be roughly measured by one noteworthy fact: Every week on page 3, the paper lists the five most-read articles on its website. When Freyne or Totten wrote the political column, it was a fixture in the top 5 — and often the #1 most-read story. Under Bromage and Heintz, it rarely appears in that list. I’m not blaming the writers; I suspect it’s editorial direction that’s blandified the column.

And I daresay, if Peter Freyne were alive today and looking for a job, there’s no way in Hell that Seven Days would hire him.

After all, remember the last writer who really tried to be edgy and different? Lauren Ober? She (cough) “left” the paper after an ill-tempered blogpost about one of Vermont’s sacred cows — Phish — generated a lot of blowback.

I’m not defending Ober’s post, which was overly juvenile in tone (but not without some insight). But I am saying this: Lauren Ober was an edgy writer — and a young one, who was still growing into her considerable innate talent. Her superiors knew she was an edgy writer, and presumably they wanted her to be that way. They knew she was a work in progress in need of some development to reach her potential. But when she got in trouble with the Phish phans, her bosses pretty much pulled the rug out from under her, appending this disclaimer to Ober’s apology blogpost:

Opinions expressed on our staff blog do not necessarily reflect the views of editors or staff at Seven Days. Many of us are longtime Phish fans, and all of us appreciate what the band, and its fans, are doing for our state.

In journalism, if a reporter screws up, it’s standard practice for the editor and publisher to lend public support — even if they’re privately tearing the reporter a new one. You just don’t leave a reporter out to hang. Especially since nothing a reporter writes will see the light of day without an editor (or three) reviewing the copy. If a reporter goes too far, it is with the direct or implicit assent of his/her superiors. The Ober incident revealed a management that was more concerned with its image than with its integrity.  

The same revelation can be seen in Seven Days’ frequent blandness, its inconsistency, and its faux edginess.

Look, I’m a fan of Seven Days. I read every issue, and I visit its website several times a week. I want it to be the real force for the public good that I know it can be. I criticize because I see the potential for Seven Days to be so much more.

And so, as the paper searches for Bromage’s replacement, my plea: Find somebody good and strong. Someone with a commitment to alternative journalism in the finest sense: journalism that is truly without fear or favor, that takes no prisoners, that isn’t afraid to make judgments or even have a point of view.

Find that person, hire them, and then get our of their way.