Thursday, November 30, 2006

The changing shape of news

All of us in the newspaper business have no idea what the future holds. The Internet has become such an important part of everyone's life ... What do we do? What should we do? How do we survive?
Well, seems that it's not just newspapers that are trying to figure it out. It's TV and radio, too.
I went to the City Club in Cleveland this afternoon for a lunch program on "News Media Newly Delivered." On the panel were Tom O'Hara, the managing editor of The Plain Dealer; Mike McCormick, news director of WKYC-TV3; and Darren Toms, director of news programming for Clear Channel radio in Cleveland.
All those news deliverers used to have their own niche -- newspapers had printed stories, TV had video, radio had audio -- but now everybody is doing everything.
Also, we used to do battle with one another. Now we are cooperating. It is a strange new world.
What do you think? How can we keep people reading the paper as well as the Internet?
You guys know as much as we know -- and probably more.
Let me know if you have any ideas.

5 comments:

Kelly Boyer Sagert said...

I think that it's the interactive nature of the blog that appeals so much to people in this instant information age of the Internet.

Although, to some degree, newspapers and other print media are bound by the unforgivingly static nature of their finished product, the concept of responsiveness / interactivity is worthwhile to pursue, in my opinion, for people working in all media.

Loraine Ritchey said...

Patti, as you may be aware on our "WoM" blog we have had some discussioon as to "editing" letters to the editor. Not having the same restrictions of space and language of content that is given to print media we are able to print responses in total. I was curious as to the Chronicle's policy of editing the -letters to the editor.

If the writer of a rebuttal was not using the Chronicle as a conduit to respond to say another letter by a third party printed but in direct response to something staff members wrote would you print the rebuttal in full and if not why not and would you state that the letter had been edited for content due to language or length or personal attack? Thanks Loraine

Patti Ewald said...

I'll get back to you on this. I'm going to ask our editorial page editor because, frankly, I don't know the answer to your question. I am fairly sure we do publish all letters -- as long as the writer can be verified -- but I don't know if or why they are cut. We newsroom folks don't have a lot to do with the editorial page. I like it that way -- helps us to stay objective.
(The only person who has his feet in both kingdoms is Andy Young, the editor.)

Patti Ewald said...

Loraine -- Here is what Dave Perozek, editorial page editor, told me. Hope it helps. p.

"Generally I limit all letters to 300 words, but if the letter is written by someone we have taken aim at in an editorial, that person is allowed as much space (within reason) as they want to respond. Example: I once permitted attorney Eric Zagrans more than 900 words to respond to one of our opinions."

Loraine Ritchey said...

Thanks and I credit the Chronicle for their rebuttal policy . I have to say they have always printed my letters in total and kindly corrected my grammatical mistakes ( smile) Loraine