We report. You decide.
A few of you have suggested that we consider following the lead of the Wisconsin State Journal in Madison and let readers use the Web site to vote for the story they'd most like to see on the front page.
From managing editor Tim Kelley's announcement early this week:
Under the "Reader's Choice" heading, we'll offer four or five story choices varying day to day from local to national, entertainment to sports. You'll be able to see immediately how your choice stacks up against others, and check back later for final results.
In the paper, we'll identify the day's top vote-getter with a "reader's choice" label. Unless later-breaking, major news displaces it, the reader's choice typically will appear on the front page.
An article about it is here.
The results so far have been what I'd call reasonable. From an NPR story: Editor Ellen Foley says she and her colleagues have been pleasantly surprised to see the results. Instead of lighter fare, for instance, readers chose the triumph of Hamas in Palestinian elections -- and what that will mean for Palestinian-Israeli relations -- as their top choice. Today, the Reader's Choice story is on affordable dental care and, with only two full paragraphs visible, barely squeaks onto the page.
It's a daring concept in passing control to the reader. I'm thinking through how it would work as we push more local and "unique" stories to the front. If an article has been on the Web site -- and, presumably on television -- most of the day, won't readers already know it? And if they already know it, are we delivering as much value by putting it on the front page?
Comments (3)
To report abuse of the comment feature on this site, please use the feedback form at the bottom of any page.
But the assumptions that editors have had for eons are in full effect here. Why should we all be pleased that the Hamas story was #1 on a given day? If it was a well-written backgrounder explaining Hamas' role in Palestianian politics and perhaps offering a brief history of Sinn Fein as a rough political parallel, that's great. If it's the typical "Bush frets as Hamas is elected" take, then it's nothing we didn't already know.
Those of us in the "news" business seem to assume that society is better off if everyone spends several hours a day following traditional political news and disaster coverage. Not necessarily.
Let's go back a few years and say you had a choice between Clinton-Lewinsky coverage or a story about a bunch of Apple computer engineers working on some small device that could store music. The "good" choice, by our provincial standards, would've been the former. But which story had more impact of people's lives today?
Posted on January 29, 2006 5:33 PM
Looking at their Web site, it doesn't seem that the whole story is up -- just a one-line blurb about the story in the voting area. And most of the stories listed were not what we would call "breaking news" -- so by giving a more in-depth story in the paper, I think it would add value. Especially since we know how in-depth stories on TV go.
I think it's a great idea, myself. I think sometimes we get too insulated in our newsroom, and by having the readers weigh in daily on what they want to hear about, it would give us a little more perspective on what they want, rather than what we think they want.
And who's to say it can't be local? We have several stories that go to B, inside B, sports, etc., that I think would be great to put on the list for readers. And if they pick the national story once in a while -- well, there are ways to localize that, too.
Posted on January 30, 2006 3:25 PM
I sent the link to John when I saw it. I continue to think it could be a good fit for the direction N&R is moving with the online site.
Your online readers are a vocal and opinionated lot. You take a lot of lot of flack for your choices, so why not give the people what they want? Let them choose.
As I understand it, the choice doesn't affect the print version. I don't see a down side unless it gets spammed, or overrun by freepers.
with an agenda.
just saying...
Posted on February 2, 2006 10:09 PM