An update on the Lex report
A mere two weeks ago, we asked Lex Alexander to research and advise us on how we could enhance the News & Record's relationship with our readers and the community through our Web sites. Specifically, we wanted to know the best ways to make our online presence a true town square with lots of news, commentary and voices being heard, debated and acted upon. True to fashion, Lex asked the world for help.
We certainly got it, and I thank everyone who played. Dan Gillmor's mantra of readers knowing more than we do certainly resonated.
Lex submitted his memo and then skipped town. (He'd probably argue that he's simply taking a well-deserved vacation.) Before he left he asked if he should post the report. I told him I wanted to read it first. (What can I say? I'm an editor. That's what I do.) I've read it now. I'm still thinking through his conclusions and have some questions, but I like it. I think we can pull much of it off.
In any case, as soon as the Lexster returns next week, he'll post his report on his site. And, of course, we welcome comments and suggestions.
Comments (7)
To report abuse of the comment feature on this site, please use the feedback form at the bottom of any page.
Awww, come on. Not even a tidbit? We won't tell Lex if you won't tell Lex. ;)
Posted on December 29, 2004 2:54 PM
Tease.
Posted on December 29, 2004 5:35 PM
I can't wait to see it! Where's Lex, I'll go get him.
Posted on December 29, 2004 9:07 PM
Well, if you've read any of the comments at his place or at PressThink, you'll have a pretty good idea of the direction.
Posted on December 30, 2004 11:55 AM
Mr. Robinson: thank you for allowing your readers to participate in your examination of your newspaper. We appreciate your openness and willingness to consider views alternative to your own.
Last year, I wrote you concerning the feature by staff writer Len Alexander "Strange Days." This article contained 62 items of which at least 20 reflected badly on either the Administration, Bush, Republican Legislators or prominent conservative public figures. None mentioned Democrats or prominent liberals.
I pointed out that surely,some Democrat candidates, Hillary Clinton, Ted Kennedy, Jesse Jackson or some other notable liberal made a bonehead statement or took an outrageous position, which would qualify for inclusion in the article. Unless, of course, the reporter had an obvious political bias; which is clearly the case.
It was refreshing to see that in this year's edition of "Strange Days", Alexander promised to be "(almost) politics free." I hope this reflects your efforts to make the newspaper more moderate and balanced.
Incidentally, in his blog, Alexander maintains he is a consertative writer.If you examine his articles, and his blog, you would conclude that if he is conservative, then his definition of conservative is far from the mainstream conservative thought. Most would consider him at least overwhelmingly liberal in his ideas, and many would consider him alarmingly left-wing.
Thanks again for your efforts to consider the possibility that the newspaper may be different than you consider it, and for your efforts to more evenly reflect your readership.
Posted on January 1, 2005 11:29 AM
Mr. Conklin,
I don't think very many things are conservative or liberal. I do, however, think that the party in power will get most of the pokes of fun simply because it is the reigning authority. So, when Republicans control the White House, Congress and the Supreme Court, they are going to have to tolerate the slings and arrows of others. Satirizing the downtrodden is not only unseemly, it's not funny.
Posted on January 2, 2005 7:01 PM
Actually, Mr. Conklin, the choice to make the article "(almost) politics-free" was mine and no one else's -- which is appropriate, given that my name was on the article, not anyone else's.
I'll let your take on my political philosophy slide except to observe that you seem to have awfully strong opinions on it for someone who doesn't know what it is.
Posted on January 2, 2005 8:52 PM