Moxie irony: It might be improving morale
My colleague Erica Smith blogs over here about the campaign that began at my company this week: “Turn up the Moxie!” The internal campaign is designed to raise awareness about how many people use the Post-Dispatch newspaper and our web site.
Erica correctly notes that moxie “has become the most popular word in the newsroom. Something doesn’t work? Not enough moxie. Something does work? You’ve got moxie!”
Erica even launched a wildly successful Twitter-counter-campaign, in which words of favorite quotations, movie lines and song lyrics are replaced by #moxie. There’s been a wealth of submissions (I was late to the party, so a lot of mine are showing up more recently).
My wife, however, points out the irony: Everyone’s having such a good time poking fun at it, it might actually be boosting morale.
7 reasons 1-to-1 newsroom training is needed
The anecdote goes something like this: A guy complains that he can’t get any work done when he’s in the office. People are always interrupting him, asking questions, bugging him for help. A co-worker reminds him the interruptions are his work. Epiphany.
I heard that story a long time ago; I bring it to mind frequently. A big part of my job is helping co-workers get comfortable with the tools of the job — tools they had never heard of when they started in journalism, or never thought they’d need.
So, while group training is important, here’s seven reasons why the one-on-one time is likely never going away. Read more
The debate over the ongoing utility of editors
As I mentioned in an earlier post, I’m working on a colum for The American Editor about the future of editors in the news business. I’ve been working Google overtime trying to track down anything in the past few weeks that has touched on the debate — blogs or news stories.
I’d appreciate it if any readers know of something I’ve missed; please point it out in the comments.
I am particularly interested because there have been at least a couple of references to a “drumbeat” of debate over the need for copy editors, for example. Read more
In a series: Do we still need editors today?
I’ve been involved in an e-mail exchange with Jeff Jarvis over the issue of the utility of editors in this day and age. I’ll post more about this before the week’s out, but I’m working on a column on that question for The American Editor, ASNE’s magazine (here’s my last column for them, by the way. Their web site is way behind, sadly).
Jeff asked me about my thoughts on his post about “newsroom economics,” in which he posits a 30 percent reduction in staff and a redeploying of resources (and fewer editors). I give him props for noting that it’s an academic exercise that has plenty of room for improvement (although he didn’t actually use those words…).
Here’s what I like about what he wrote:
- He cut national and world news coverage. Bravo. For the love of God, it’s a commodity now, isn’t it?
- He increased local beat reporting.
- He increased resources to investigative reporting. I suggest that what he didn’t say was this: Everyone has to have a role in “investigative” reporting. That’s why we have beat reporters! I suspect his 1.5 people would be folks who can facilitate and aide with that process as projects come around.
Here’s where I have some questions:
- I’d definitely put some resources into developing online databases. Those can be useful tools to beat reporters and investigations — as well as fascinating online content in its own right. (One of his commenters already said this.)
- I also concur with the idea that he’d want someone with some mad web skilz. Maybe that’s someone in the “database” group.
- I wouldn’t make a distinction between “beat” reporters and “breaking news” reporters. If he wants someone dedicated to handling breaking news (for online, I assume), then create an old-style “rewrite desk.” We have two reporters at the Post-Dispatch who work staggered shifts on the “online news desk.”
They can write stories as they break, but they also take dictation from reporters in the field, give a quick once-over to stuff that other reporters e-mail, etc. My only fear is that creating a distinction between beat reporters and breaking news reporters somehow absolves beat reporters of dealing with breaking news.
More later. But would happily hear feedback on the idea of whether the levels of editing we have in newspaper newsrooms is excessive — and, if so, who is doing a good job of redeploying staff?
Kurt's Tweets- Bravo. RT @pwthornton: "Banning unsigned online comments undermines the media’s role as a forum for debate.” http://bit.ly/bmZsOn
- I would like to just take the two steps forward and skip the one step back. How about that? Would that be OK?
- Still seeking talented journalists to run #Patch sites in two south St. Louis County communities. Know anyone? http://ow.ly/2Axnv
- Waiting for a listings collector to give her more #Patch marketing cards. The work never stops.
- Realizing how woefully out of touch I have been with this part of the county. (@ Saint Louis Bread Company) http://4sq.com/5z5Bfh