I have been remiss in acknowledging that long-time Hemmings web editor Daniel Strohl has ventured off to greener pastures. He became web editor for the Minnesota Pollution Control Agency. I know from my own experience as a state worker that this can be quite a shift from the private-sector publishing realm.
In a LinkedIn post, Strohl (2023b) said that the new position “has afforded me the opportunity to write about many topics I haven’t previously written.” For example, one of his initial stories was a profile of the agency’s new point person on climate change.
Strohl struck me as one of the most important auto history writers in the United States. This was partly because of the unusual nature of his gig, which as far as I can tell was the closest to being a daily reporter for the auto history field. The relentless deadline pressure he faced may have constrained the depth with which he could write on a given topic, but I think the trade-off was invaluable. He was uniquely able to cover topics in close to “real time.”
Just as importantly, Strohl (2023a) was around for so long — 19 years — that he became a walking encyclopedia of all things automotive. In a farewell post, Strohl estimated that he had written “somewhere north of 13,167 articles” for Hemmings’ print magazine and website. As a fellow writer, that sounds like a remarkable amount of content.
Strohl offers advice for readers and perhaps journalists
The best part of Strohl’s closing remarks was to encourage readers to write an automotive story. His words may be even more appropriate for those of us who run publications:
“Whatever the story and wherever you choose to present it in whatever format, it should be honest and factual and true. It should come from curiosity and should inspire even more curiosity. It shouldn’t be done to satisfy some agenda, to sell something, as fill-piece ‘content,’ or to support an unjust status quo. It should be told without fear or favor and with a greater good at heart. It should be a bulwark against the unrelenting threat of forgetting. Above all, it should be a story that you want to read.” (Strohl, 2023a)
I particularly appreciate his point about eschewing “fill-piece ‘content.'” I see entirely too much of that when I cruise through Indie Auto’s “Bibliography of Links” to find stories to post on our Facebook page. Clickbait treats readers as eyeballs to be sold to advertisers rather than intelligent people who seek to better understand our world.
Strohl writes more about why he left Hemmings
More than a week after Strohl’s departure from Hemmings, he stopped by a website called eWillys to address criticisms from some commentators. As a case in point, Keith (2023) complained that Strohl “didn’t know poop about Jeeps and just spewed the same old myths and misinformation.”
“WTF, guys,” Strohl (2023c) responded. “I left Hemmings for multiple reasons, one of which was this tendency of the audience to pick apart everything that I and my colleagues did after we spent as much time as reasonably possible to get things right and to tell an interesting story.”
Also see ‘Mike Spinelli: Car buff readers can be sanctimonious nitpickers’
This reminded me of former Jalopnik editor Mike Spinelli (2015), who lamented that readers could get indignant — if not downright sanctimonious — when pointing out errors. For example, “you get the old guys on Hemmings where you accidentally call something a Valiant and, ‘Oh, no that was a transition year where the Imperial and Valiant. . . .’”
Indie Auto has had a similar experience. I’m a one-man band so appreciate when folks point out errors that I miss in the writing and editing process. However, sometimes readers can be awfully dismissive when doing so. It can get old after a while. And in the case of Strohl, apparently old enough to move on.
Strohl supported diversity in auto history media
Strohl should also be lauded for recognizing that automotive history is a team sport. One way that showed up was his regular “Four Links” column, which highlighted the work of other websites — including Indie Auto. This helped us find a readership base, which was more than worth spikes in fanboy complaints whenever one of our stories was mentioned.
Truth be told, Hemmings is big enough that it doesn’t need to give us small fry the time of day. But Strohl apparently saw that introducing his readers to other websites helped to support a diversity of voices in the auto history media. In other words, he was walking his talk about focusing on the “greater good.”
I hope that whoever is tapped to fill Strohl’s shoes will carry on his legacy.
Share your reactions to this post with a comment below or a note to the editor.
RE:SOURCES
- Hernandez, Freddy “Tavarish”; 2015. “Shut Up, You’re not My Real Mom!” Offtrack. Posted May 21.
- Keith; 2023. Commentator in “Daniel Strohl’s Last Article with Hemmings.” eWillys. Posted 3:05 p.m., Aug. 11.
- Strohl, Daniel; 2023a. “At Least a Dozen Stories I Never Got to Write.” Hemmings. Posted Aug. 4.
- ——; 2023b. “Activity.” LinkedIn. Posted circa Sept. 21.
- ——; 2023c. Commentator in “Daniel Strohl’s Last Article with Hemmings.” eWillys. Posted 8:57 a.m., Aug. 13.
Thanks, Steve, for the nice comments. I’m glad somebody took what I wrote in that farewell post to heart.
To be clear, the nitpicking was one of many reasons I had for leaving Hemmings. I loved what I did there, and I felt pride in supporting a great institution like Hemmings, but ultimately public service will be better for my career.
Keep fighting the good fight, Steve. I always admired what you’re doing with Indie Auto.
Thank you for you kind words, Daniel. I hope that you have an enjoyable stint in the public sector. I would imagine that you’ll do quite well. It can be a different reality from the publishing realm, but I found it mostly worth the occasional frustrations.
Daniel is missed by more than one person at Hemmings. My daily checkin has tapered off to once a blue moon. Glad to hear you have made a move that fits with your state of mind Daniel. Best of luck and, in an indirect way, thanks for introducing me to indieauto. All the best to both of you guys.
Let me get this straight: Strohl wrote about 700 articles a year, and all the articles were high quality, and his feelings are hurt because of some criticism? Seven hundred articles a year, for 19 years?
Yeah, that’s close to two articles a day.
I will be happy to send him a box of hankies.
Yes, my comment is supposed to be humorous, but still, 700 articles a year??? 🤦🏻♂️🤦🏻♂️🤦🏻♂️🤦🏻♂️
I can empathize with him. My experience is that some people can be royal assholes on the Internet — and you as a reader may only see the tip of the iceberg.
We journalists are trained to develop thick skins. The problem isn’t criticism per se, which is integral to the enterprise, but dealing with difficult people. It can get old after a while. And if one is feeling burned out or frustrated with one’s job for other reasons, there’s a point where one might ask: Is there a better way to make a living?
Often there is. Journalism skills are readily transferrable to other career tracks that can pay much better, the workload is more manageable, and the people one deals with tend to possess stronger social skills (or are more inclined to actually use them).