Mark Luckie to WaPo

Mark Luckie, multimedia producer at California Watch and proprietor of the "10,000 words" blog (one of my favorites), announces he's moving to the Wasington Post.

Good luck!

WaPo layoffs again raise print vs. web talk

These are strange times we live in. Times when, from what I can tell about visiting, working in, and consulting with newsrooms and just shooting the bull with lot of journalists, we make Dr. Jekyll and Mr. Hyde look like pikers when it comes to shifting personalities over the digital vs. the print.*

The latest to put this in bas relief are the layoffs at the Washington Post online operations, including, apparently, well-respected journalist Travis Fox.

Every so often an eruption will occur and venom, or at least highly acidic comments, will pour out from the "printies" and the "web heads." I trace it to about a year and a half ago, during the July Fourth weekend, when Media General laid off folks at its Tampa operation. An intern, Jessica DaSilva, blogged about it and appeared to take praise management for its forward thinkingness - and the knives came out and all bets were off.

Until that time, there seemed to be an uneasy truce between "trad" media folk who were tolerating the online whippersnappers and the digital folk who were convinced that the mainstream media types were clearly the problem and the answer was to stop being paticularly tolerant and just sweep them away (read all 200 + comments to DaSilva's post and you'll see what I mean). For several months, at least, the rhetorical wars seemed to escalate before calming down. But I sensed a shift had occurred, a wall of civility had been breached, never to be truly patched over again.

From time to time it flares up again, as it has with the WaPo layoffs. Read the comments on the Washington City Paper story and then read Matthew Ingram's thoughtful post on the subject.

For about a year, in my other hat as executive editor of The Convergence Newsletter, I've been trying to get some interest in someone doing a piece that looks at the rhetorical exchanges. Am I right, will historians look back and find that on that July 2008 weekend things did change irrevocably?

Comments here welcome, but even more welcome would be someone to take up the challenge (I've not written it myself because rhetoric is one of those areas where I know just enough to be dangerous). No money is involved (we're a publication that tries to span academics and the real world, after all). All I can do is offer 600-1,200 words and a byline in a newsletter with 1,000-plus international circulation.

---
*Strange phenomenon I have noticed is that in many newsrooms people know what needs to be done. They are not clueless. But they are paralyzed by inability to act in a coherent way. They know the dragon is at the door, but they alternatively want to get the fire extinguisher or just pretend it's a puddy kat.

Fitz & Jen

One of the better places to stop and check what's happening in the business is the new (couple of months old) blog by Mark Fitzgerald and Jennifer Saba of Editor & Publisher. This one's now hosted by Nielsen Business Media (finally, E&P's getting on board with the idea of blogging).

They do a good job of zeroing in on the business aspects of the business and let the screechers and doomsayers peddle their wares elsewhere.

Two interesting things of recent note from the blog:

• Except for the triple-digit Washington Post stock, every other major newspaper company is now trading for less than $10. (And several, most recently Gatehouse, have headed off the major exchanges and onto the penny-stock pink sheets.)
• Cnet technology columnist Don Reisinger's take on what happens to the newspaper industry. The flippant tone is sure to infuriate some newspaper execs, but listen carefully. In many ways he just echoes what many of us have said -- that the papers most in danger are the mid-market ones who are caught between the life-saving cash flow of print but the cash-draining needs of doing an online operation right (cash draining because in many markets we still have not reached the critical mass needed to make those operations solidly profitable, though many do have positive cash flow). Watch it below:
  

How good a copy editor are you?

The Washington Post's Gene Weingarten has an ode, of sorts, to copy editors today.

Actually, it's an error-filled missive that will be a great test if you want to be a copy editor -- and is a great reminder to others of the job copy editors do. (And yes, his copy is contrived, but we all have seen such junk come across a desk and -- in my case as a former reporter -- have written it, too.)

(Thanks to the ACES board for the pointer.)

Curley rolls the dice

In case you hadn't hear elsewhere, Rob Curley, one of the uber new(s) media types/web develppers who came out of Lawrence, Kan., worked his magic in Naples, Fla., and went on to be vice president of new product development at Washington Post Interactive (full bio) is now headed to Las Vegas.

Curley's bringing along a gaggle of WPI staffers and former interns to the Las Vegas Sun and the Greenspun print and broadcast properties. The Sun already is one of the online intelligentsia's hot properties -- it is impressive with what it is doing on the Web, having the short end of the JOA stick as it does in the gambling mecca -- and with Curley & Co. on board, it should be smokin'.

Derek Willis has a cold-eyed assessment of Curley's time at WPNI: It would be a bigger ouch for WPNI if Curley’s team was more a part of the organization, but it was clear from early on that they were, if I can borrow the phrase, a pluggable app rather than deeply ingrained in the organization.

Fewer 'touches' at the Post; realignment at the AP

I find myself having mixed emotions as I read Washington Post Executive Editor Leonard Downie's memo outlining the news editing setup for the A section. (More in Jack Shafer's story from Friday that I just got to today.)

Yeayyyy. They get it.

We will remove layers of editing by providing greater flexibility to determine when a story is edited and by whom. We will create truer alignment of editing for the web and for the paper, recognizing that deadlines for many pieces are defined as the earliest moment they can be edited and published online. We will deepen collaboration among editors on assignment desks, copy desks, photo and the news desk to change how a story, graphic or photograph goes into the newspaper.

Overall, these changes are meant to make our editing model less like an assembly line -- moving copy towards the presses on a pre-determined schedule – and more like a network, responding to how journalism is actually created, distributed and discovered by our audiences in print and online. We believe this evolution is possible while ensuring the quality of our editing and the quality of life of editors.

But then I find myself saying wait a minute. It sounds simple, but it's not.

In a nutshell, the nightside national and foreign copy desks will be combined. Some folks will come off those desks and move to dayside where they now will be "assistant editors." More editing will be done on days, especially feature and enterprise material that does not have to wait till the evening. There will be more collaboration, etc. etc.

Doing more editing on dayside is common sense; it never made sense, all those years I was in newsrooms, why stories would have to wait till the copy desk filled up at midafternoon or later. Well, yes, it made sense in the long-entrenched culture of the newsroom: The hunter-gatherers worked days; the cooks worked nights, preparing the repast for the next day's audience. But it never made logical sense, so in that way, bully to the WaPo. In the digital age, it is silly to have a half-dozen editors "touch" most stories -- it was even silly in the day of the sheet-fed letterpress -- and it is even sillier to relegate it to one eight- to 10-hour period of the day.

After three people (assigning editor, copy editor and slot) touch a routine story (OK, four if you include a proofer), in most cases the marginal benefits drop rapidly. Managing Editor Phil Bennett is right in suggesting that too often the additional editors are less about quality and more about diffusing responsibility.

But about those "assistant editors." That bothers me because -- you'll think this silly if you haven't spent time in a newsroom -- titles mean and imply something. When copy editors become "assistant editors," there's this implication -- and you can pick it up from the memo -- that they go from being challengers to collaborators -- maybe even co-conspirators.

I fear there will be less of an imperative to challenge. Assigning editors are not always inclined to do it -- nor, in some ways, do I expect them to. I want them invested in the story, in there fighting for it, a passionate advocate for the writer and the work. That makes it tough to call "bullshit" (Exhibits A through Z are some of the stories that reach a copy desk every day) though the best can and do. There needs to be an outside party advocating for the reader, and I'm not sure "assistant editors" fit that, unless you have a major shift in newsroom culture -- and that includes getting reporters to file those pieces early enough to be edited early. (Read some other insights from Testycopyeditors.)

Shift, of course, is exactly what Downie & Co., are trying to do, which is why this bears close watching. If they can pull it off and maintain quality, it will be an important step.

Update: See the well-crafted post by David Sullivan, a Philadelphia copy editor, who elaborates on the difficulties involved. As Sullivan notes, this has been tried before, pre-Internet with the "pods" and "circles" of the early 1990s, with pretty uniformly bad results. But that was then, when the industry was not under siege. This is now, when even the most recalcitrant journalist probably would concede the stakes have never been higher.

---

At the AP, which already is laying plans for centralized editing desks, the consolidation beat goes on. A friend sends along this memo from AP President Tom Curley. Doesn't it just send warm chills down your spine to hear talk of "unification of ... revenue operations" and to see things like sports and business as "verticals" under, essentially, a super-sales operation? (So then what is "news" -- you know, the kind of stuff that holds governments' feet to the fire? Guess it falls under that "breaking" commodity stuff AP plans to sell as almost a loss leader.) No wonder the members are restless:

AP Staff:

To help drive AP s growth and competitiveness as the content marketplace evolves digitally, I'm excited to announce a unification of our revenue operations.

AP will consolidate its three business units -- newspapers, broadcast and digital -- so that they can better meet the converging needs of today's media industry. This reorganization will allow us to improve the speed and execution of decision-making, so we can more quickly and effectively bring new products to market. It also should simplify points of contact for members and customers. The restructuring puts into action a critical piece of the strategy mapped out last year at the Lake Placid corporate retreat.

Tom Brettingen, senior vice president for global newspaper markets, will become chief revenue officer for AP and senior vice president in charge of the new consolidated Sales and Marketing Department. In that capacity, Tom will oversee all sales and marketing operations worldwide. His department will include:

* Jane Seagrave, currently vice president for new media markets and director of AP Digital, who is promoted to senior vice president for global product development. In her new position she will oversee continuing development of our content verticals -- entertainment, sports, elections and business -- as well as Web video and all future product development.

* Sue Cross, now vice president/U.S. newspapers online, who is promoted to senior vice president for global new media and U.S. print and broadcast markets. Sue will also join the AP Management Committee, the group of senior managers that oversees AP operations and strategy.

* Joy Jones, vice president for global business operations, who is promoted to vice president for marketing operations. Joy will manage marketing, customer service, distribution platform planning and sales planning and analysis.

* Ian Cameron, vice president of AP Images, who will continue his current position.

* Eric Braun, vice president and head of AP Television News, and the regional directors of Global Newspaper Markets will also report to Tom.

Jim Williams, senior vice president of Global Broadcast, who has presided over the enormous revenue growth and success in AP's global broadcast division, will be retiring. Jim has agreed to stay for another month to help steer us through these changes. Jim departs with an enviable track record of accomplishments and a great fan base. To say that we appreciate his nearly 30 years of service and that we wish him continued success is an understatement. He will be missed.

As these changes take effect over the next days and weeks, a number of people will also be changing reporting relationships. We ll keep you informed as developments occur.

If you write about blogs, link dammit

Continuing evidence that the New York Times still does not totally get it when it comes to online. (And if the Times is held up as one of the exemplars of this business, what does that say about too many of the rest?)

Maria Aspan writes today's Exhibit A: At Web Site for Journalists, Criticism of a Campaign Article Becomes a Melee.

It's a story about how a Boston University professor and former Washington Post stringer criticized not only an article about Barack Obama and the "Muslim" rumors surrounding him, but the 27-year-old reporter himself, suggesting the reporter had been mainstreamed onto the political beat too early. (Interestingly enough, it wasn't the first time the Post had approached the issue. A Jan. 23 blurb by Howard Kurtz had a headmaster of a madrassah denying that Obama had attended. However, the latest story was on the front page.)

In the Times, Aspan details how Jim Romenesko's blog, the Poynter Insitute's one-stop-for-all-the-tawdry-details site about journalism (and a must-read for many, many journalists) linked to the original criticism by BU Prof Chris Daly, setting off a cross e-mail war of postings on Romenesko's site.

So, does Aspan's story link to any of this?

No. The only links we get are insipid ones to the Times' own canned profiles of the Post, Boston U. and Obama.

So let's all repeat again: If you are going to publish online, and especially if you are going to write about online things, then you are expected to link to them so that your readers can check it out for themselves.

Yes, this is harder than just having a few insipid machine-generated navel gazing links appear in the middle of a story. It might actually require an editor/producer to think about what the story says and include the relevant links. That's part of the online landscape. Learn to deal with it.

(Update: A friend at the Times informs that those links were not machine-generated but were put there by a real editor. Not sure what that editor was thinking ...)

(At Media Nation, Dan Kennedy gives you some other links the Times doesn't.)

WaPo in the red?

At the 24/7 Wall St. blog, Douglas McIntyre speculates that the Washington Post's newspaper operations may soon head into the red.

The reason: Slower online revenue growth (11%) and a drop in audience that has pushed it down 139 positions in Alexa rankings in three months. (The usual warning: One takes such rankings from Alexa and Compete with a bit of a grain of salt.) Meanwhile, overall operating income at the paper has dropped to about $9 million, down about half from a year ago.

McIntyre contrasts the Post with the New York Times, which is showing somewhat robust growth.

Interesting, since the Post's online operations often are held up as a model of innovation. I had a chance to visit this year and was impressed just with the vibe of the place. But the Post, while national, has never been known as "the" national paper, and it's still trying to find a good local online formula, as near as I've been able to tell, as is much of the industry. Here's hoping things improve.

Curley gives an inside look at WaPo.com

Rob Curley provides an inside look at how it works inside the two top floors of the Virginia office tower that are dedicated to washingtonpost.com.

His last two grafs:

“Nearly all of those ideas are from non-newspaper sites. They’re from other websites that had a kernel of an idea that they had used on their website that this person on our team recognized as being something that, if modified and used in the news industry, might work really well.

“So these people (the members of his team) are of the Internet. It is in their DNA. That’s what makes a lot of these newspaper sites completely suck is because so many of them are run by people who don’t have the Internet in their DNA.”

Curley says he's being quoted in a Northwestern University report coming out later this week on innovation in the news media. I haven't seen it yet, but if you do, throw a link in the comments, will ya?

Brevity memo from WaPo

Today's theme seems to be brevity. No sooner had I posted the Redundicide graphic than a friend sends a memo issued yesterday from the Washington Post honchos. Good advice in the text below (for clarity and length, I have bulleted a few items and colllapsed a few grafs, but no words have been changed):

Feb. 28, 2007, Memo from Washington Post Executive Editor Leonard Downie Jr. and Managing Editor Philip Bennett to the Paper’s Staff
To: The Staff
From: Len and Phil

Our outstanding journalism comes in all sizes, including long pieces that deserve every inch. But for too long we've confused length with importance. Often the result has been stories that readers don't want to finish and displays in the newspaper that don't do our journalism justice.

We have decided to take a more disciplined approach to story lengths, with guidelines that are consistent with giving our readers quality journalism in a variety of appropriate lengths.

Here are guidelines for writers and editors. Please study and follow them. We are asking AMEs to enforce them.

Story Lengths–A Newsroom Strategy

Goals
The newspaper should be filled with stories of different sizes.

We need to show discipline in writing and storytelling. We especially need to pay attention to midrange stories that are too long, given the underlying material.

We want to give reporters and editors the tools to edit better for length, and we want to give page designers a wider selection of story lengths to help them showcase all our journalism better.

A philosophy to live by: Every story must earn every inch.

Methods
1. A Rough Guide
The physical size of the newspaper imposes real constraints on story lengths. With headlines and photos, a page takes 65 inches of text. The only stories that run that long are projects. Otherwise, we must get several stories on most pages. To keep the paper lively and interesting, we must strive for variety, including some stories that are short. Through long experience with layout and design, and taking into consideration the news holes typically available on inside pages, we’ve come up with some guidelines for story lengths:

• A small event, or an incremental development worth noting can be a digest item. The digests are important for readers.
• A day story, significant enough to write for our readers but based on one event or development – 6 to 15 inches. We frequently end up with 12-inch holes in the paper. Let’s use them to the best advantage.
• A single event with multiple layers or levels of information, 18 to 24 inches.
• A more complex news feature of ambition and altitude–25-35 inches.
• Major enterprise, involving in-depth reporting or narrative story telling–40 to 50 inches.
• Extraordinary long-form narrative or investigation, magazine-type stories–60 to 80 inches or, rarely, more.

2. For Writers
Writers need to take responsibility for earning every inch of their stories. Every writer should consider:
In structure, does the story move cleanly from one sub-theme or topic to the next? If it wanders and circles back, look for ways to deal with sub-themes one at a time. Good chronology makes for good storytelling.
Watch out for artificial transitions. They burn up space needlessly. In many newspaper stories you don’t need a transition from one idea to the next.

To build effective, memorable mental images, pay attention to characters. Can you describe who we are hearing from, what they look and sound like, and where they are coming from?

Is there a high, clear and powerful nut graf? Even the most extraordinary narrative needs to get to the point. For stories on the front page and section fronts, we must get to the nut graf before the jump.

We must avoid repetition. Don’t use two or three quotes when one will do. The same goes for anecdotes. Resist the urge to quote someone just because you interviewed them.

We are often saddling readers with too much recapitulation and background. In writing both news and features, reporters should strive to eliminate stale material. If you must revisit events to make the current material work, be sparing. Cast a cold eye on B-matter. Every story about a complex running issue does not need to recap everything that’s happened. Write for readers, not your sources.

Show, don’t tell. Can you animate your characters and recount events in a way that will let the scenes and voices speak for themselves, rather than using the reporters’ voice to tell it all? Watch out for excessive adjectives that tell us what to think, rather than summoning real experiences and events that show us what happened.

3. For Editors
An editor on each desk will be deputized to ensure that we stay true to the principles we’re enunciating here: compliance with guidelines, accurate budgeting, coordination with page designers and layout.

This editor will scrutinize lengths based on our common editing criteria and will have power to hold a story and ask that it be redone based on length.

He or she will make sure that stories on the budget have passed through this process. All stories will be put on the budget with their actual lengths as approved and edited by that desk.

The editor in charge of story lengths – and the person running the day on each desk – must actively engage page designers. They should visit the News Desk and look at the pages and available news holes before determining the day’s cutback. The goal is to establish story lengths that will work both for the words and for the design.

If a longer story is offered for A1 and does not make it, and it is to be published inside the A section or another section, it should be scrutinized for length, consistent with the design needs of the section.

------
I want to know if the editor gets a sheriff's badge. Now that would be worth the hassle.

WaPo multimedia profile

If you can sit through the blatant Apple product advertising, this is a very interesting video on the Washington Post's multimedia operation.