ASNE column: What’s the future for editors?

August 3, 2008 by Kurt · View Comments
Filed under: general 

As I said in an earlier post, I’m writing a column for the fall edition of the ASNE’s quarterly magazine, sparked by the media buzz over the future of editors and copy editors in these tough times.

I get 800 words (and I’ve gone a smidge over), but here’s what I’ve written; feedback welcome:

* * *

In the frenzy following a fatal shooting in the Kirkwood, Mo., city council on Feb. 7, the St. Louis Post-Dispatch’s web site briefly confused the name of killed officer Tom Ballman with the name of another nearby St. Louis suburb: Ballwin.

Within minutes, said Continuous News Editor Amanda St. Amand, three readers pointed out the mistake. “They were very observant, very quick to point it out,” she said. “And we were happy to fix it.”

For some journalists, that’s evidence that newsrooms are either too fast to post news online or too slow to put editors between reporters and the web. For others, it illustrates a strength web sites have over the printed newspaper: Readers can get involved in shaping — even editing — the news in almost real time. Read more

Tags: , ,

In a series: Do we still need editors today?

July 15, 2008 by Kurt · View Comments
Filed under: staff 

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?

Tags: ,