Oct 10th, 2006 | Reimagination | No Comments
Dennis Ryerson, editor of the Indianapolis Star, writes about how his paper wants to make better use of its readers as sources for stories and pictures, which he describes (using a word that Wired magazine appears to have coined) as “crowd-sourcing.” As he puts it:
“We rarely if ever ask for the public’s help when we research an important issue such as operation of the Marion County coroner’s office (now under investigation by the prosecutor’s office) or what’s happening with the county’s troubled juvenile detention center.
Why? In part, because the highly competitive nature of our business — we want to be first with the most — makes us reluctant to tip off our TV, weekly print and online competitors to what we are doing. And in part, it may be because of professional arrogance. We know what we are doing and we don’t need your help, thank you very little. That has to change.”
Oct 10th, 2006 | Blogs, Media 2.0, Reimagination | No Comments
Must be easy getting people to blog at the Washington Post — according to editor Len Downie, speaking at the recent Online News Association’s conference, everyone wants to blog there. Here’s an excerpt of a recent piece in Editor & Publisher:
“He said instead that the increased focus on the Web has “improved journalism a lot, way more than we could have expected.” He said that the 24/7 news cycle has changed his newsroom for the better, with reporters always tuned in to what’s happening and constantly trying to find stories to report for the Web site — and that reporters could add more detail because the Web had “unlimited newshole.”
“I was known for writing long as a reporter, I edit long, and now there’s a place to put it all,” he said. Reporters love newsroom blogs, said Downie, because they put writers in better touch with their readers: “Everyone in our newsroom wants to be a blogger.” And the blogs that pick apart every article that the Post produces are a good thing, said Downie, because they “keep the paper honest” and, even if their commentary isn’t positive, bring people to the site.”
Oct 6th, 2006 | Reimagination | No Comments
In a Q & A on the globeandmail.com website with new editorial-page editor John Geiger and op-ed editor Patrick Martin, there were some questions about the Globe’s comments feature and the strengths (or weaknesses) of that feature. I’ve excerpted the comments here, and globeandmail.com editor Jim Sheppard’s response:
R. Harris: This would be a good time for you to explain how your on-line comment-on-this-article function works. How do you decide what to post and what not to? I don’t mean the rules. We can read those. How many posts do you typically get that are not posted (on a percentage basis). How do you decide when to cut off debate? Some stay for days and others disappear in hours. Thank you.
David Demner, Vancouver: Hi, I’m a pretty devout reader of The Globe and Mail and think the reporting is top notch. I must say, though, that the comments on the website really reflect badly on the newspaper. The usually outstanding reporting by The Globe and Mail is seriously undercut by the useless rants that form the majority of comments that are posted, especially when anything even remotely political is involved. Perhaps if the comments didn’t go through an approval process, we would take them with a grain of salt. But to know that these types of comments were actually approved reflects, I think, quite badly on The Globe. I think that there are really three routes that can be taken — either remove the approval process altogether, or have the approval process be much more critical, or remove comments altogether. I would recommend the second since the first won’t solve your main problem and the third seems a little too draconian.
→ continue reading
Sep 18th, 2006 | Blogs, Reimagination | No Comments
The New York Times had a recent piece about how far bloggers have come in terms of being considered influential, in this case in the fashion industry:
Once snubbed by the insular fashion world for their sometimes snarky reviews and tiny audiences, fashion bloggers are now attracting the attention of the fashion establishment. As blogs claim bigger followings, and advertisers shift more spending to them, designers see these independent Web publishers as a new marketing opportunity.
Many small designers, in particular, now realize they can get valuable exposure on blogs that they might not get in mainstream media. This year, with 191 shows in New York, up 25% from five years ago, there aren’t enough old-media critics to cover them all. “I would say we’ve become more selective,” says Ed Nardoza, editor-in-chief of Women’s Wear Daily, the industry trade newspaper.
Sep 18th, 2006 | Blogs, Reimagination | No Comments
A new feature at MSNBC sees the photo editors at the news site posting a picture they particularly liked or didn’t like, and then giving a short critique of the photo.
