from Garrison Keillor's daily almanac:
Today is the birthday of publishing colossus William Randolph Hearst, who was born in San Francisco in 1863.
He demanded the helm of his first paper, the San Francisco Examiner, when he was 23 and his father acquired the paper as payment for a gambling debt. It wasn't long before his papers had a reputation for sensationalism, or as it came to be called, "yellow journalism" — one of his writers said "A Hearst newspaper is like a screaming woman running down the street with her throat cut."
On the other hand, Hearst newspapers also employed some of the best writers in the business, like Ambrose Bierce, Mark Twain, Stephen Crane, and Jack London.
He and Joseph Pulitzer had an open rivalry in the New York market. Reporters from Hearst's Morning Journal and Pulitzer's World went beyond scooping each other to stealing stories outright from the competition.
Hearst had the last laugh when he ran a story about the death of Colonel Reflipe W. Thenuz — an anagram of "we pilfer the news" — and Pulitzer's paper took the bait, even adding made-up dateline information.
This prank was harmless enough, but when the U.S. battleship Maine exploded in Havana harbor in 1898, the two papers both published a supposedly suppressed cablegram saying the explosion was not an accident. There was no such cable, but it boosted sales of both papers to record levels, and the public demanded that President McKinley declare war on Spain.
As the famous story goes, artist Frederick Remington was sent to Cuba by Hearst to cover the war. He wrote home, "There is no war. Request to be recalled," only to be told, "You furnish the pictures, I'll furnish the war." And so he did.
Friday, April 29, 2011
Wednesday, April 27, 2011
In Half or In Two
Just curious -- this is a headline from WNDU this morning.
Does something "crack in half" or does it "crack in two?"
Semi cracks in half on Toll Road
Elkhart County
A semi-truck snapped in half on the Toll Road during Wednesday morning rush hour.
Posted: 6:57 AM Apr 27, 2011
Reporter: Joel Schipper
Email Address: Joel.Schipper@wndu.com
Does something "crack in half" or does it "crack in two?"
Semi cracks in half on Toll Road
Elkhart County
A semi-truck snapped in half on the Toll Road during Wednesday morning rush hour.
Posted: 6:57 AM Apr 27, 2011
Reporter: Joel Schipper
Email Address: Joel.Schipper@wndu.com
Tuesday, April 26, 2011
In Praise of Editors
Here's a great post by master agent/publisher Steve Laube:
In Defense of Traditional Publishing: Part Three
CONTENT DEVELOPMENT
I need to clarify what I’m attempting to do with this series of posts. I am not digging deeper trenches and pouring the dirt over a head that is already buried in the sand. Some think I’m defending a dying industry and failing to see the changes around it. This series is merely an attempt to remind us what traditional publishers do well. Their critics are jettisoning all of traditional publishing as antiquated. But I posit that there is good to be found in the things that brought publishing to this place.
Today’s topic is Content Development – or more simply, “Editorial.”
Many critics say that the day of great editors are past. The legends are gone and instead we now have overworked editors who don’t have time to spend crafting and developing an author’s content into a masterpiece. They have become paper-pushers.
While editors are generally overworked…that is not anything new. It has been that way for a long time. While at Bethany House Publishers I managed the acquisition and editorial development of nearly fifty titles per year. But I did not work alone.
Editing is a multi-person process in the traditional publishing companies. First is the acquisitions editor who finds, defends, acquires, and negotiates the acquisition of a project (i.e. The Curator). Many times the actual content edit (also call the “line” or “substantive” edit) is done by a different person. The content editor look for accuracy, balance and fairness, cogency of argument, adequate treatment of the defined subject matters and issues, and also includes conformity to all aspects of the description of the work contained in the original book proposal. (That sentence is an adaptation from actual contract language defining an “Acceptable” manuscript.)
Next comes the copy editor who scours the manuscript looking for accuracy in grammar, citations, and factual content. Then it is sent to a proof reader who scours the work for fine-tuned details in punctuation and other tiny details.
These editors are amazing people. And despite the cutbacks in many major publishing houses there are still a number of truly incredible men and women who stay behind the scenes and pour their minds and hearts into the books they work on.
In the Christian industry I’ll highlight one man as an example (and he will likely be embarrassed by this!). David Kopp is an exceptional editor with Waterbrook Multnomah. He was the one who created the eight million copy bestseller The Prayer of Jabez out of a nearly unpublishable massive manuscript. He worked on the bestseller Do Hard Things by the Harris brothers. And recently he helped transform a book about missions into what is now called Radical (by David Platt) that has been on the NY Times bestseller list for 43 weeks (as of this writing).
This is the type of talented person that sits unknown in an office in a traditional publishing house… helping to create magic. I could rattle off a dozen or more names off the top of my head of similar people who make this happen every day. And that does not include the number of freelancers who are hired by publishers to take up the slack when they cannot meet the demands of the editing process in-house.
A critic might say, “But I can just hire these freelance people myself. Why do I need a traditional publisher?” That is a good point. But it misses a critical part of the process. It is illustrated by the question, “Who pays the invoice?”
Think about it for a moment. In a traditional publishing house the publisher is basically in charge. If there is a major dispute over editorial changes or input, the publisher has final say and contractual clout. Rarely is this used as a hammer, but the writer always knows it is there. In almost every case there are long discussions and a compromise is achieved.
But when the author hires the editor, who is the boss? The writer is the boss. The writer will usually defer to an editor’s comments. But what if your novel is going down a terrible path, a path to commercial destruction? I know of a case where an author was bent on writing a particular storyline and would not take anyone’s advice. His agent was unsuccessful. His writing friends and critique partners could not sway him from the path. If he were self-publishing he would have failed miserably. Instead an editor at a traditional publishing house recognized the talent and came alongside with valuable suggestions. The author, realizing that the editor had the goal of creating a great book, acceded to the advice. The book was saved, is now in print, and being sold in stores everywhere.
I also know of another case where a freelance editor took an author’s manuscript (to be self-published) and rearranged the non-fiction content from a topical presentation to a chronological presentation. (The book was the history of a specialized type of job in our court system.) The editor felt that a history should be told chronologically instead of topically. The author disagreed and made the editor put it all back the way it was in the first draft. Because the author was “paying the invoice” the author’s wishes prevailed. The book did not sell and was not adopted as a textbook, which was the goal of the author.
James Michener once said, “I’m not a good writer; I’ve been a masterful re-writer.” He has a fascinating book called James A. Michener’s Writer’s Handbook (1992). In this work are reproductions of the interaction between Michener and his editor. You can see the original text, the editorial suggestions, and the rewrite. A interesting exchange that is rarely seen.
As with the idea of “curation” I believe the editorial or content development process is a vital part of what a traditional publisher does for an author’s work.
Part One: Introduction
Part Two: Curation
In Defense of Traditional Publishing: Part Three
CONTENT DEVELOPMENT
I need to clarify what I’m attempting to do with this series of posts. I am not digging deeper trenches and pouring the dirt over a head that is already buried in the sand. Some think I’m defending a dying industry and failing to see the changes around it. This series is merely an attempt to remind us what traditional publishers do well. Their critics are jettisoning all of traditional publishing as antiquated. But I posit that there is good to be found in the things that brought publishing to this place.
Today’s topic is Content Development – or more simply, “Editorial.”
Many critics say that the day of great editors are past. The legends are gone and instead we now have overworked editors who don’t have time to spend crafting and developing an author’s content into a masterpiece. They have become paper-pushers.
While editors are generally overworked…that is not anything new. It has been that way for a long time. While at Bethany House Publishers I managed the acquisition and editorial development of nearly fifty titles per year. But I did not work alone.
Editing is a multi-person process in the traditional publishing companies. First is the acquisitions editor who finds, defends, acquires, and negotiates the acquisition of a project (i.e. The Curator). Many times the actual content edit (also call the “line” or “substantive” edit) is done by a different person. The content editor look for accuracy, balance and fairness, cogency of argument, adequate treatment of the defined subject matters and issues, and also includes conformity to all aspects of the description of the work contained in the original book proposal. (That sentence is an adaptation from actual contract language defining an “Acceptable” manuscript.)
Next comes the copy editor who scours the manuscript looking for accuracy in grammar, citations, and factual content. Then it is sent to a proof reader who scours the work for fine-tuned details in punctuation and other tiny details.
These editors are amazing people. And despite the cutbacks in many major publishing houses there are still a number of truly incredible men and women who stay behind the scenes and pour their minds and hearts into the books they work on.
In the Christian industry I’ll highlight one man as an example (and he will likely be embarrassed by this!). David Kopp is an exceptional editor with Waterbrook Multnomah. He was the one who created the eight million copy bestseller The Prayer of Jabez out of a nearly unpublishable massive manuscript. He worked on the bestseller Do Hard Things by the Harris brothers. And recently he helped transform a book about missions into what is now called Radical (by David Platt) that has been on the NY Times bestseller list for 43 weeks (as of this writing).
This is the type of talented person that sits unknown in an office in a traditional publishing house… helping to create magic. I could rattle off a dozen or more names off the top of my head of similar people who make this happen every day. And that does not include the number of freelancers who are hired by publishers to take up the slack when they cannot meet the demands of the editing process in-house.
A critic might say, “But I can just hire these freelance people myself. Why do I need a traditional publisher?” That is a good point. But it misses a critical part of the process. It is illustrated by the question, “Who pays the invoice?”
Think about it for a moment. In a traditional publishing house the publisher is basically in charge. If there is a major dispute over editorial changes or input, the publisher has final say and contractual clout. Rarely is this used as a hammer, but the writer always knows it is there. In almost every case there are long discussions and a compromise is achieved.
But when the author hires the editor, who is the boss? The writer is the boss. The writer will usually defer to an editor’s comments. But what if your novel is going down a terrible path, a path to commercial destruction? I know of a case where an author was bent on writing a particular storyline and would not take anyone’s advice. His agent was unsuccessful. His writing friends and critique partners could not sway him from the path. If he were self-publishing he would have failed miserably. Instead an editor at a traditional publishing house recognized the talent and came alongside with valuable suggestions. The author, realizing that the editor had the goal of creating a great book, acceded to the advice. The book was saved, is now in print, and being sold in stores everywhere.
I also know of another case where a freelance editor took an author’s manuscript (to be self-published) and rearranged the non-fiction content from a topical presentation to a chronological presentation. (The book was the history of a specialized type of job in our court system.) The editor felt that a history should be told chronologically instead of topically. The author disagreed and made the editor put it all back the way it was in the first draft. Because the author was “paying the invoice” the author’s wishes prevailed. The book did not sell and was not adopted as a textbook, which was the goal of the author.
James Michener once said, “I’m not a good writer; I’ve been a masterful re-writer.” He has a fascinating book called James A. Michener’s Writer’s Handbook (1992). In this work are reproductions of the interaction between Michener and his editor. You can see the original text, the editorial suggestions, and the rewrite. A interesting exchange that is rarely seen.
As with the idea of “curation” I believe the editorial or content development process is a vital part of what a traditional publisher does for an author’s work.
Part One: Introduction
Part Two: Curation
What He Thinks He Knows About Journalism
Here are some thought-provoking observations from a great observer/participator in the journalistic process. You can read the entire post and also see reader comments at http://pressthink.org/2011/04/what-i-think-i-know-about-journalism/
What I Think I Know About Journalism
April 26th, 2011 by Jay Rosen
Next month I will have taught journalism at New York University for 25 years, an occasion that has led me to reflect on what I have tried to profess in that time.
Or, to put it another way, what I think I know about journalism. #
It comes down to these four ideas. #
1. The more people who participate in the press the stronger it will be. #
2. The profession of journalism went awry when it began to adopt the View from Nowhere. #
3. The news system will improve when it is made more useful to people. #
4. Making facts public does not a public make; information alone will not inform us. #
Shall we take them in order? #
The more people who participate in it the stronger the press will be. #
The more people involved in flying the airplane, or moving the surgeon’s scalpel during a brain operation, the worse off we are. But this is not true in journalism. It benefits from participation, as with Investigate your MP’s expenses, also called crowd sourcing, or this invitation from the Los Angeles Times: share public documents. A far simpler example is sources. If sources won’t participate, there often is no story. Witnesses contribute when they pull out their cameras and record what is happening in front of them. The news system is stronger for it. #
In 1999, I wrote a whole book on this idea: What Are Journalists For? It’s about what today we would call “engagement.” But that was pre-Web. Today we can do a lot more. According to the internet’s one percent rule, a very small portion of the users will become serious contributors, which is still a lot of people. Let’s say you’re a beat reporter who has a niche blog on the local public schools (like this one) with a loyal user base of 10,000. If the one percent rule is accurate, 100 of those loyal users are likely to become heavy contributors if given the chance. They should be given that chance. It will strengthen the site. #
That’s what I believe. But we still don’t know very much about how to make these pro-am combinations work, because for a very long time the news system was optimized for low participation. Switching it over is extremely difficult work. Even CNN’s i-Report, which claims 750,000 contributors worldwide, is poorly integrated into the main CNN newsroom. In what Alan Rusbridger, editor of The Guardian, calls the “mutualization” of journalism, most of the big discoveries lie ahead of us. We ought to get cracking. #
The profession of journalism went awry when it began to adopt the View from Nowhere. #
It’s Bill Keller insisting that “torture” is the wrong word for the New York Times to use in describing torture because it involves taking sides in a dispute between the United States Government and its critics. It’s Howard Kurtz suggesting that Anderson Cooper was “taking sides” when he called the lies of the Libyan government lies. But it’s also the reporter who has to master the routine of “laundering my own views [by] dinging someone at some think tank to say what you want to tell the reader.” And it’s that lame formula known as he said, she said journalism. It’s the way CNN “leaves it there” when two guests give utterly conflicting accounts. #
Long ago, something went awry in professional journalism the way the Americans do it, and it caused these visible deformations. In my own criticism I have given various names to this pattern: agendalessness, the quest for innocence— most often, the View From Nowhere. The problem is not what it is usually said to be: that the press is supposed to remain “objective” but no one can be totally unbiased. The problem is equating trustworthiness with the prohibition on taking sides, when the actual result may be exasperation with he said, she said, rage at the helplessness that “leaving it there” creates, and mistrust of the formulaic ways in which journalists try to advertise their even-handedness. #
“Harsh interrogation” isn’t a more objective term than torture. Rather, it appears to offer more protection against charges of bias. But these stratagems haven’t worked. The View from Nowhere is increasingly mistrusted. Journalists have to go back and fix the wrong turn they took. #
The news system will improve when it is made more useful to people. #
In the 1970s and ’80s, a number of classics in press scholarship were written by social scientists (like Herbert Gans and Gaye Tuchman) who went into newsrooms to study how decisions were made there. They all observed that routines drive what happens in journalism, and that these routines ultimately served the demands of a particular production cycle: the daily newspaper, the 6 p.m. broadcast, the monthly magazine. Ideas about what journalism is–and even what it can be–get frozen within these routines as they become second nature to the people who have mastered them. #
Look at how J-schools organized the curriculum and you can see what I mean: there’s newspaper journalism, magazine journalism, broadcast journalism. Why do we teach it that way? Because the production routine is god. Master that and you’ve learned the business. #
But that was during the era of heavy industry. The lighter, cheaper, and less restrictive publishing tools that we have today can free the news system from the production gods. The new gods are the users themselves, and what they find useful for staying informed and participating in public life— you know, getting things done. Which is why I’ve said that the simplest way to add value in journalism is to save the user time. #
Making facts public does not a public make; information alone will not inform us. #
There’s a reason why the word narrative has been on the rise in journalism, almost to the point of cliche. It’s become obvious to people that good information alone cannot inform us. News stories pushed at us can be defeated by narratives with greater pull. Under conditions of abundance, the arc of attention matters more than the availability of information. #
To feel informed, we also need background knowledge, a framework into which the relevant facts can be put. Or, as I put it in 2008, “There are some stories—and the mortgage crisis is a great example—where until I grasp the whole I am unable to make sense of any part. Not only am I not a customer for news reports prior to that moment, but the very frequency of the updates alienates me from the providers of those updates because the news stream is adding daily to my feeling of being ill-informed, overwhelmed, out of the loop.” #
In The Lost Art of Argument, Christopher Lasch said we should invert the usual order of information and debate. “We do not know what we need to know until we ask the right questions, and we can identify the right questions only by subjecting our own ideas about the world to the test of public controversy. Information, usually understood as the precondition of debate, is better understood as its by-product. When we get into arguments that focus and fully engage our attention, we become avid seekers of information. Otherwise, we take in information passively– if we take it in at all.” #
So that’s what I think I know about journalism, after 25 years of teaching it, studying it, and writing about it. #
Of course, I’m still learning. #
What I Think I Know About Journalism
April 26th, 2011 by Jay Rosen
Next month I will have taught journalism at New York University for 25 years, an occasion that has led me to reflect on what I have tried to profess in that time.
Or, to put it another way, what I think I know about journalism. #
It comes down to these four ideas. #
1. The more people who participate in the press the stronger it will be. #
2. The profession of journalism went awry when it began to adopt the View from Nowhere. #
3. The news system will improve when it is made more useful to people. #
4. Making facts public does not a public make; information alone will not inform us. #
Shall we take them in order? #
The more people who participate in it the stronger the press will be. #
The more people involved in flying the airplane, or moving the surgeon’s scalpel during a brain operation, the worse off we are. But this is not true in journalism. It benefits from participation, as with Investigate your MP’s expenses, also called crowd sourcing, or this invitation from the Los Angeles Times: share public documents. A far simpler example is sources. If sources won’t participate, there often is no story. Witnesses contribute when they pull out their cameras and record what is happening in front of them. The news system is stronger for it. #
In 1999, I wrote a whole book on this idea: What Are Journalists For? It’s about what today we would call “engagement.” But that was pre-Web. Today we can do a lot more. According to the internet’s one percent rule, a very small portion of the users will become serious contributors, which is still a lot of people. Let’s say you’re a beat reporter who has a niche blog on the local public schools (like this one) with a loyal user base of 10,000. If the one percent rule is accurate, 100 of those loyal users are likely to become heavy contributors if given the chance. They should be given that chance. It will strengthen the site. #
That’s what I believe. But we still don’t know very much about how to make these pro-am combinations work, because for a very long time the news system was optimized for low participation. Switching it over is extremely difficult work. Even CNN’s i-Report, which claims 750,000 contributors worldwide, is poorly integrated into the main CNN newsroom. In what Alan Rusbridger, editor of The Guardian, calls the “mutualization” of journalism, most of the big discoveries lie ahead of us. We ought to get cracking. #
The profession of journalism went awry when it began to adopt the View from Nowhere. #
It’s Bill Keller insisting that “torture” is the wrong word for the New York Times to use in describing torture because it involves taking sides in a dispute between the United States Government and its critics. It’s Howard Kurtz suggesting that Anderson Cooper was “taking sides” when he called the lies of the Libyan government lies. But it’s also the reporter who has to master the routine of “laundering my own views [by] dinging someone at some think tank to say what you want to tell the reader.” And it’s that lame formula known as he said, she said journalism. It’s the way CNN “leaves it there” when two guests give utterly conflicting accounts. #
Long ago, something went awry in professional journalism the way the Americans do it, and it caused these visible deformations. In my own criticism I have given various names to this pattern: agendalessness, the quest for innocence— most often, the View From Nowhere. The problem is not what it is usually said to be: that the press is supposed to remain “objective” but no one can be totally unbiased. The problem is equating trustworthiness with the prohibition on taking sides, when the actual result may be exasperation with he said, she said, rage at the helplessness that “leaving it there” creates, and mistrust of the formulaic ways in which journalists try to advertise their even-handedness. #
“Harsh interrogation” isn’t a more objective term than torture. Rather, it appears to offer more protection against charges of bias. But these stratagems haven’t worked. The View from Nowhere is increasingly mistrusted. Journalists have to go back and fix the wrong turn they took. #
The news system will improve when it is made more useful to people. #
In the 1970s and ’80s, a number of classics in press scholarship were written by social scientists (like Herbert Gans and Gaye Tuchman) who went into newsrooms to study how decisions were made there. They all observed that routines drive what happens in journalism, and that these routines ultimately served the demands of a particular production cycle: the daily newspaper, the 6 p.m. broadcast, the monthly magazine. Ideas about what journalism is–and even what it can be–get frozen within these routines as they become second nature to the people who have mastered them. #
Look at how J-schools organized the curriculum and you can see what I mean: there’s newspaper journalism, magazine journalism, broadcast journalism. Why do we teach it that way? Because the production routine is god. Master that and you’ve learned the business. #
But that was during the era of heavy industry. The lighter, cheaper, and less restrictive publishing tools that we have today can free the news system from the production gods. The new gods are the users themselves, and what they find useful for staying informed and participating in public life— you know, getting things done. Which is why I’ve said that the simplest way to add value in journalism is to save the user time. #
Making facts public does not a public make; information alone will not inform us. #
There’s a reason why the word narrative has been on the rise in journalism, almost to the point of cliche. It’s become obvious to people that good information alone cannot inform us. News stories pushed at us can be defeated by narratives with greater pull. Under conditions of abundance, the arc of attention matters more than the availability of information. #
To feel informed, we also need background knowledge, a framework into which the relevant facts can be put. Or, as I put it in 2008, “There are some stories—and the mortgage crisis is a great example—where until I grasp the whole I am unable to make sense of any part. Not only am I not a customer for news reports prior to that moment, but the very frequency of the updates alienates me from the providers of those updates because the news stream is adding daily to my feeling of being ill-informed, overwhelmed, out of the loop.” #
In The Lost Art of Argument, Christopher Lasch said we should invert the usual order of information and debate. “We do not know what we need to know until we ask the right questions, and we can identify the right questions only by subjecting our own ideas about the world to the test of public controversy. Information, usually understood as the precondition of debate, is better understood as its by-product. When we get into arguments that focus and fully engage our attention, we become avid seekers of information. Otherwise, we take in information passively– if we take it in at all.” #
So that’s what I think I know about journalism, after 25 years of teaching it, studying it, and writing about it. #
Of course, I’m still learning. #
Monday, April 25, 2011
Prepping for Tonight's Candidate Forum
Sarah e-mailed me earlier today, asking about how much biography, etc. to include in the article for this evening's forum. Here is my answer--hope it is of help to you, also. We'll have a little time at 6 p.m. to discuss before we go to the forum.
It should be written for the local audience—Times-Union audience—who could not attend but wants to know what each candidate stands for. The biographical information is not as important as what they will be saying when given a chance to speak and answer questions. Presumably readers will want to know “what do they stand for….for whom should I vote?” Your job is not to be partisan, but to accurately and succinctly report what the candidates present as their main issues or solutions for the town’s problems. Biographic information should only be presented as it explains or gives context to their positions.
One of your tasks will be to decide what the main news element is—how you will lead, and what the headline should be. We can’t know that until experiencing the presentations tonight.
Good question—good luck!
It should be written for the local audience—Times-Union audience—who could not attend but wants to know what each candidate stands for. The biographical information is not as important as what they will be saying when given a chance to speak and answer questions. Presumably readers will want to know “what do they stand for….for whom should I vote?” Your job is not to be partisan, but to accurately and succinctly report what the candidates present as their main issues or solutions for the town’s problems. Biographic information should only be presented as it explains or gives context to their positions.
One of your tasks will be to decide what the main news element is—how you will lead, and what the headline should be. We can’t know that until experiencing the presentations tonight.
Good question—good luck!
Saturday, April 16, 2011
Town Elections Blogsite Mounted
We were trying to figure out how to get candidate information available to people who visit the Town of Winona Lake Facebook page.
Brilliant idea--we opened up a new blog and then can just link to it from many sources.
Check it out here
http://winonalaketownelections.blogspot.com/2011/04/winona-lake-elections-candidate.html
Brilliant idea--we opened up a new blog and then can just link to it from many sources.
Check it out here
http://winonalaketownelections.blogspot.com/2011/04/winona-lake-elections-candidate.html
Thursday, April 14, 2011
Facebook Trying to 'Friend' Journalists
New York (CNN) -- Facebook is taking major steps to ensure that its News Feeds contain more actual news.
The social media giant is hiring someone to build relationships with reporters and news organizations. The new hire also will help organize journalism-focused events, the first of which will take place this month at Facebook's headquarters in Palo Alto, California.
Vadim Lavrusik will start as journalist program manager for Facebook, based in New York, April 25. He leaves Mashable, the tech-news site where he was a community manager. (Mashable is a CNN.com content partner.)
In his new job, Lavrusik will be responsible for advocating for the use of Facebook as a reporting and promotional tool. He will also maintain the recently launched Journalists on Facebook page.
With more than half a billion users, Facebook is nearly ubiquitous as a way for keeping in touch with friends and family. However, the site has lagged behind competitors like Twitter and Tumblr in widespread adoption by reporters as a productivity or newsgathering tool.
"A lot of journalists don't have a professional presence on Facebook yet," Lavrusik said. "They think it's another thing they have to add to their workloads. ... It can actually make your job easier."
Lavrusik, a Belarus native, caught the eye of Facebook executives with his blog posts about the practical applications for using the giant social network in reporting. For example, he urges the use of Facebook as a sort of new-age White Pages, helping reporters get in contact with sources.
Before Mashable, Lavrusik interned at the New York Times as a social media producer. He also teaches a graduate-school journalism class about social media at Columbia University.
"The goal is to build programs that bridge the gap between journalists and Facebook," Lavrusik said. "Twitter is very public. It's an informational platform. It's easy to see the application for news."
Lavrusik will help educate about and carry out Facebook's new newsy mission, which some people close to the company say is a case of Twitter envy. (Last fall, Facebook's offer of $2 billion to acquire Twitter was spurned, according to a Fortune report.) Journalists very quickly took to Twitter and, in doing so, helped promote it to their readers and viewers.
"I feel lucky that we just have such a lead and such an advantage of being part of newsrooms already," said Robin Sloan, a member of Twitter's three-person media-partnerships team. "It's a luxury. We get to go into newsrooms, and, literally, on every other monitor, people are running TweetDeck or logged into Twitter.com."
Facebook also has a group specializing in media partnerships, which Lavrusik will be working closely with, a company spokeswoman said. But that group mainly focuses on business-development initiatives, Lavrusik said. Those programs help news organizations implement tools such as the Like button and the new Facebook-powered commenting system, which are designed to help create more links between news sites and Facebook's network.
Twitter's media-partnership team helps teach and field questions from reporters about how to use its service in their work, said Sloan, who joined Twitter from Current TV last year. That's on top of all the partnerships that the group cultivates with news-agency marketers, award-show promoters, sports and entertainment networks and others that fall under the all-encompassing "media" umbrella.
"Even before there was anybody working on media partnerships at Twitter, journalists were just using it like crazy," Sloan said. "The kind of work that journalists and news organizations do on Twitter is really the work that they've always done and are good at."
Sloan doesn't believe that Facebook's growing focus on the news industry is at odds with his team's efforts. Reporters, he said, "need all the tools that they can get. So we're just trying to make Twitter as useful and powerful as we can and fill in that part of the puzzle."
Mark Coatney, Tumblr's media evangelist and a former journalist, concurs, saying that each is used differently. Neither Facebook nor Twitter "is really designed to be a content delivery platform" but is instead used to link to or find articles, he said. "From a branding perspective, a page on Facebook will always look like Facebook."
Tumblr, a smaller but growing social network with 16.8 million blogs, hired Coatney as a media evangelist last year. The former Newsweek editor's job offer came the same day the Washington Post Co. put his magazine company up for sale, he said.
During Coatney's short tenure, Tumblr has achieved a sort of Facebook or Twitter status with reporters; his job mostly entails brainstorming ideas for how Tumblr can be employed uniquely. His journalism outreach may have even spurred reporters to write about Tumblr more often.
"The story ideas have moved from, 'Hey, what is this thing?' to, 'Here's some cool things that are being done on Tumblr,' " Coatney said.
Encouraging cultural influencers such as journalists to use social networks provides value to these companies and also to the reporters who get a new arsenal of tools, said Dan Gillmor, a digital-media professor and director for the Knight Center at Arizona State University.
"I don't know if it will cause people to write about them more, but it's obviously a smart thing for these companies to be evangelizing journalists," Gillmor said. "The more people who use these platforms for their work, the better it is for the platforms."
The social media giant is hiring someone to build relationships with reporters and news organizations. The new hire also will help organize journalism-focused events, the first of which will take place this month at Facebook's headquarters in Palo Alto, California.
Vadim Lavrusik will start as journalist program manager for Facebook, based in New York, April 25. He leaves Mashable, the tech-news site where he was a community manager. (Mashable is a CNN.com content partner.)
In his new job, Lavrusik will be responsible for advocating for the use of Facebook as a reporting and promotional tool. He will also maintain the recently launched Journalists on Facebook page.
With more than half a billion users, Facebook is nearly ubiquitous as a way for keeping in touch with friends and family. However, the site has lagged behind competitors like Twitter and Tumblr in widespread adoption by reporters as a productivity or newsgathering tool.
"A lot of journalists don't have a professional presence on Facebook yet," Lavrusik said. "They think it's another thing they have to add to their workloads. ... It can actually make your job easier."
Lavrusik, a Belarus native, caught the eye of Facebook executives with his blog posts about the practical applications for using the giant social network in reporting. For example, he urges the use of Facebook as a sort of new-age White Pages, helping reporters get in contact with sources.
Before Mashable, Lavrusik interned at the New York Times as a social media producer. He also teaches a graduate-school journalism class about social media at Columbia University.
"The goal is to build programs that bridge the gap between journalists and Facebook," Lavrusik said. "Twitter is very public. It's an informational platform. It's easy to see the application for news."
Lavrusik will help educate about and carry out Facebook's new newsy mission, which some people close to the company say is a case of Twitter envy. (Last fall, Facebook's offer of $2 billion to acquire Twitter was spurned, according to a Fortune report.) Journalists very quickly took to Twitter and, in doing so, helped promote it to their readers and viewers.
"I feel lucky that we just have such a lead and such an advantage of being part of newsrooms already," said Robin Sloan, a member of Twitter's three-person media-partnerships team. "It's a luxury. We get to go into newsrooms, and, literally, on every other monitor, people are running TweetDeck or logged into Twitter.com."
Facebook also has a group specializing in media partnerships, which Lavrusik will be working closely with, a company spokeswoman said. But that group mainly focuses on business-development initiatives, Lavrusik said. Those programs help news organizations implement tools such as the Like button and the new Facebook-powered commenting system, which are designed to help create more links between news sites and Facebook's network.
Twitter's media-partnership team helps teach and field questions from reporters about how to use its service in their work, said Sloan, who joined Twitter from Current TV last year. That's on top of all the partnerships that the group cultivates with news-agency marketers, award-show promoters, sports and entertainment networks and others that fall under the all-encompassing "media" umbrella.
"Even before there was anybody working on media partnerships at Twitter, journalists were just using it like crazy," Sloan said. "The kind of work that journalists and news organizations do on Twitter is really the work that they've always done and are good at."
Sloan doesn't believe that Facebook's growing focus on the news industry is at odds with his team's efforts. Reporters, he said, "need all the tools that they can get. So we're just trying to make Twitter as useful and powerful as we can and fill in that part of the puzzle."
Mark Coatney, Tumblr's media evangelist and a former journalist, concurs, saying that each is used differently. Neither Facebook nor Twitter "is really designed to be a content delivery platform" but is instead used to link to or find articles, he said. "From a branding perspective, a page on Facebook will always look like Facebook."
Tumblr, a smaller but growing social network with 16.8 million blogs, hired Coatney as a media evangelist last year. The former Newsweek editor's job offer came the same day the Washington Post Co. put his magazine company up for sale, he said.
During Coatney's short tenure, Tumblr has achieved a sort of Facebook or Twitter status with reporters; his job mostly entails brainstorming ideas for how Tumblr can be employed uniquely. His journalism outreach may have even spurred reporters to write about Tumblr more often.
"The story ideas have moved from, 'Hey, what is this thing?' to, 'Here's some cool things that are being done on Tumblr,' " Coatney said.
Encouraging cultural influencers such as journalists to use social networks provides value to these companies and also to the reporters who get a new arsenal of tools, said Dan Gillmor, a digital-media professor and director for the Knight Center at Arizona State University.
"I don't know if it will cause people to write about them more, but it's obviously a smart thing for these companies to be evangelizing journalists," Gillmor said. "The more people who use these platforms for their work, the better it is for the platforms."
Friday, April 8, 2011
An Investigative Reporter Speaks
Today (April 8) is the birthday of the investigative journalist who broke the story of the My Lai Massacre to the American public: Seymour Hersh (books by this author), born in Chicago (1937).
He worked as a reporter for various wire services, including the Associated Press, and eventually as a Pentagon correspondent. When he wrote an extensive piece on chemical and biological warfare that the AP cut to just a fraction of its original size, he quit to go freelance.
He got a tip that a lieutenant, William Calley, was being court-martialed for killing innocent civilians in Vietnam. Hersh drove from base to base, waking people up to ask them where Calley was, pulling all his Pentagon strings, until he found Calley and Calley told him what happened.
Life and Look magazines refused the story, but he did finally sell it. When the story hit, it made a huge impact on the public perception of the Vietnam War, and Hersh won the Pulitzer Prize.
Since 1993, he has been a regular contributor to The New Yorker, where in 2004 he exposed the Abu Ghraib prison scandal.
A friend of his said, "There's only a handful of reporters like Hersh who are still doing investigative reporting. There's a new crop of journalists who are what I call 'scandal reporters,' or 'scandal beat reporters.' They only pretend to do investigative reporting."
When asked what the secret is to being an investigative reporter, Seymour Hersh said: "I don't make deals, I don't party and drink with sources, and I don't play a game of leaks. I read, I listen, I squirrel information. It's fun."
He worked as a reporter for various wire services, including the Associated Press, and eventually as a Pentagon correspondent. When he wrote an extensive piece on chemical and biological warfare that the AP cut to just a fraction of its original size, he quit to go freelance.
He got a tip that a lieutenant, William Calley, was being court-martialed for killing innocent civilians in Vietnam. Hersh drove from base to base, waking people up to ask them where Calley was, pulling all his Pentagon strings, until he found Calley and Calley told him what happened.
Life and Look magazines refused the story, but he did finally sell it. When the story hit, it made a huge impact on the public perception of the Vietnam War, and Hersh won the Pulitzer Prize.
Since 1993, he has been a regular contributor to The New Yorker, where in 2004 he exposed the Abu Ghraib prison scandal.
A friend of his said, "There's only a handful of reporters like Hersh who are still doing investigative reporting. There's a new crop of journalists who are what I call 'scandal reporters,' or 'scandal beat reporters.' They only pretend to do investigative reporting."
When asked what the secret is to being an investigative reporter, Seymour Hersh said: "I don't make deals, I don't party and drink with sources, and I don't play a game of leaks. I read, I listen, I squirrel information. It's fun."
Thursday, April 7, 2011
Tuesday, April 5, 2011
How Twitter Affects One Court Reporter
From Poynter:
In Kansas, Twitter puts court reporter in touch with the community
by Damon Kiesow
In an elevator in a Wichita, Kan., district court in 2008, Ron Sylvester realized Twitter was changing how he practiced journalism.
Sylvester, a longtime court reporter for The Wichita Eagle and Kansas.com, had just finished covering a murder trial. It was the second time Sylvester had covered a trial live, and the first time he had used Twitter to do so.
As they rode down in the elevator, the mother of victim Chelsea Brooks turned to him and asked, “How is your knee?”
It was not a random question, and it showed Sylvester how he had changed the way readers viewed him in the community.
Sylvester posts professional and personal updates on Twitter. One of those personal tweets mentioned his need for a post-trial knee surgery.
The mother had been following his coverage. On the elevator ride, she opened up the conversation based on the human, not journalistic, information Sylvester had shared online.
Creating a personal connection
“The worst part of the job,” Sylvester told me, “is having to talk to victims’ families.” He now thinks an active presence on Twitter and other social media networks can help in such encounters.
Readers “like to know I am a dad … not just someone who covers grisly murder trials.” The more readers “know about me, the more they can decide if I am trustworthy or not.”
That echoes research I wrote about earlier this month. Engaging on social networks, and even posting reporters’ photos with stories, increases media credibility and trust, according to research by Doreen Marchionni at the University of Missouri.
Sylvester’s courtroom tweeting boosted his credibility in the courthouse, too. Early on in his coverage of that trial, he was interviewed by the ABA Journal, a publication he figures every lawyer and judge in town must read.
The next day in court, everyone wanted to know, “What is this Twitter?”
Fast, frequent updates key to trial tweeting
Sylvester had live-blogged a trial a few months earlier. He emailed updates to the office, where they were edited and posted by an editor. That process was too cumbersome, he said.
The feedback boiled down to readers wanting faster, more frequent updates. For the next trial, of accused murderer Ted Burnett, Sylvester and his editors decided to try Twitter.
He began by tweeting jury selection. By testing out the process during an early phase of the proceedings, they figured it was a good opportunity to “fail quietly” if it didn’t work.
At the time Sylvester had a few dozen followers, but readers quickly took notice. He started seeing replies on Twitter in which people told friends that the Eagle was covering the trial live.
“They know me”
The feedback from regular readers has been the most fulfilling, he said. As a reporter, “usually you only hear from people when you make them mad,” he said. “I have really started hearing the good stuff” since he’s been tweeting trials.
That goes back to the nature of the relationships on Twitter and Facebook. He notes that on social networks, people aren’t called “readers” — they’re “friends” on Facebook and “followers” on Twitter.
That’s a significant change for journalists. Rather than writing for an audience, he said, “I am sharing information with the community.”
Many people, he said, “never pick up a paper or go to a news website.” But they are on Twitter, or more likely Facebook. They learn about riots in Egypt or happenings at school board meetings through those social channels.
Sylvester advocates being where your community is, and Twitter is one of those places. In the past he might have been an anonymous byline in the newspaper. “Now,” he said, “they know me.”
In Kansas, Twitter puts court reporter in touch with the community
by Damon Kiesow
In an elevator in a Wichita, Kan., district court in 2008, Ron Sylvester realized Twitter was changing how he practiced journalism.
Sylvester, a longtime court reporter for The Wichita Eagle and Kansas.com, had just finished covering a murder trial. It was the second time Sylvester had covered a trial live, and the first time he had used Twitter to do so.
As they rode down in the elevator, the mother of victim Chelsea Brooks turned to him and asked, “How is your knee?”
It was not a random question, and it showed Sylvester how he had changed the way readers viewed him in the community.
Sylvester posts professional and personal updates on Twitter. One of those personal tweets mentioned his need for a post-trial knee surgery.
The mother had been following his coverage. On the elevator ride, she opened up the conversation based on the human, not journalistic, information Sylvester had shared online.
Creating a personal connection
“The worst part of the job,” Sylvester told me, “is having to talk to victims’ families.” He now thinks an active presence on Twitter and other social media networks can help in such encounters.
Readers “like to know I am a dad … not just someone who covers grisly murder trials.” The more readers “know about me, the more they can decide if I am trustworthy or not.”
That echoes research I wrote about earlier this month. Engaging on social networks, and even posting reporters’ photos with stories, increases media credibility and trust, according to research by Doreen Marchionni at the University of Missouri.
Sylvester’s courtroom tweeting boosted his credibility in the courthouse, too. Early on in his coverage of that trial, he was interviewed by the ABA Journal, a publication he figures every lawyer and judge in town must read.
The next day in court, everyone wanted to know, “What is this Twitter?”
Fast, frequent updates key to trial tweeting
Sylvester had live-blogged a trial a few months earlier. He emailed updates to the office, where they were edited and posted by an editor. That process was too cumbersome, he said.
The feedback boiled down to readers wanting faster, more frequent updates. For the next trial, of accused murderer Ted Burnett, Sylvester and his editors decided to try Twitter.
He began by tweeting jury selection. By testing out the process during an early phase of the proceedings, they figured it was a good opportunity to “fail quietly” if it didn’t work.
At the time Sylvester had a few dozen followers, but readers quickly took notice. He started seeing replies on Twitter in which people told friends that the Eagle was covering the trial live.
“They know me”
The feedback from regular readers has been the most fulfilling, he said. As a reporter, “usually you only hear from people when you make them mad,” he said. “I have really started hearing the good stuff” since he’s been tweeting trials.
That goes back to the nature of the relationships on Twitter and Facebook. He notes that on social networks, people aren’t called “readers” — they’re “friends” on Facebook and “followers” on Twitter.
That’s a significant change for journalists. Rather than writing for an audience, he said, “I am sharing information with the community.”
Many people, he said, “never pick up a paper or go to a news website.” But they are on Twitter, or more likely Facebook. They learn about riots in Egypt or happenings at school board meetings through those social channels.
Sylvester advocates being where your community is, and Twitter is one of those places. In the past he might have been an anonymous byline in the newspaper. “Now,” he said, “they know me.”
CBS Launches Tweet Week
From Media Daily News:
CBS Launches Tweet Week
by David Goetzl
CBS is finding a new way to capitalize on Twitter's ability to spark interactivity and engagement. The network will hold "Tweet Week" starting April 3, where stars such as Jeff Probst and Donnie Wahlberg will tweet and take questions during the live broadcasts of their respective shows.
The stunt will last eight nights, and users can join via their Twitter accounts or CBS.com. Networks have been experimenting with avenues to use Twitter -- not just to get people to watch their shows, but to create a sense of ownership among them as they engage in discussion.
"Tweet Week" begins Sunday with performer Dierks Bentley and presenter Julianne Hough offering commentary during the Academy of Country Music Awards.
The following night, two CBS Sports analysts, Greg Anthony and Seth Davis, will weigh in during the NCAA championship game. "NCIS" star Pauley Perrette, who plays forensic specialist Abby Sciuto, will interact Tuesday during the drama smash.
Probst, the longtime "Survivor" host, comes Wednesday during the popular reality show. Later on April 10, fellow reality-series host Phil Keoghan will tweet during "The Amazing Race."
Stars Simon Helberg of the "Big Bang Theory" and Donnie Wahlberg of "Blue Bloods" will dial in next Thursday and Friday, respectively.
Headliner Daniel Dae Kim finishes the live tweeting April 11 during "Hawaii Five-O."
CBS Launches Tweet Week
by David Goetzl
CBS is finding a new way to capitalize on Twitter's ability to spark interactivity and engagement. The network will hold "Tweet Week" starting April 3, where stars such as Jeff Probst and Donnie Wahlberg will tweet and take questions during the live broadcasts of their respective shows.
The stunt will last eight nights, and users can join via their Twitter accounts or CBS.com. Networks have been experimenting with avenues to use Twitter -- not just to get people to watch their shows, but to create a sense of ownership among them as they engage in discussion.
"Tweet Week" begins Sunday with performer Dierks Bentley and presenter Julianne Hough offering commentary during the Academy of Country Music Awards.
The following night, two CBS Sports analysts, Greg Anthony and Seth Davis, will weigh in during the NCAA championship game. "NCIS" star Pauley Perrette, who plays forensic specialist Abby Sciuto, will interact Tuesday during the drama smash.
Probst, the longtime "Survivor" host, comes Wednesday during the popular reality show. Later on April 10, fellow reality-series host Phil Keoghan will tweet during "The Amazing Race."
Stars Simon Helberg of the "Big Bang Theory" and Donnie Wahlberg of "Blue Bloods" will dial in next Thursday and Friday, respectively.
Headliner Daniel Dae Kim finishes the live tweeting April 11 during "Hawaii Five-O."
Monday, April 4, 2011
Class Schedule Update
4 April, 2011
To: Advanced Newspaper Journalism Students
Re: Revised schedule for the remainder of the semester
We’ve had to do quite a bit of schedule-juggling, but here is how the rest of the semester looks at this point:
Tonight – April 4. Wes Pippert will be with us by Skype (I just talked with him) His chapter is on p. 79 of the Kennedy & Moen book. Please have your questions ready for him. Since he directs the U of Missouri master’s program in journalism in Washington, DC, he may also have some good insights on changes in the newspaper industry, how journalists should be preparing for the future, etc. I hope this will be a stimulating and helpful conversation. In addition to Wes, we’ll try to look at IRE chapters 15 & 16, Stephen will lead us through the investigative reporting chapter (p. 113) in Kennedy & Moen (have your questions), Ethan will review his book “All the President’s Men” and we will try to save at least 45 minutes for critiquing your first drafts of a new story. I think this works best if you bring three copies – one for you and two critiquers, read your story out loud, everyone marks up the copies as you go, and then you discuss.
Next week, April 11 – Zach will lead discussion on “Computer-Assisted Journalism Creates New Knowledge” (p. 127). We’ll discuss IRE chapters 17 & 18, and we’ll discuss how you’re coming on your investigative projects.
April 18 – I’ll lead discussion on “How to Get the Journalism You Deserve” (p. 148) of Kennedy & Moen, and your final copies will be due for the stories you read tonight. We’ll do IRE chapters 19, 20, & 21.
April 25 is Winona Lake Town Council Candidate’s night at the senior center. Class meets at regular time. Candidate meeting starts at 7 p.m., so I’ll take one carload down at 6:30 (save us all seats) and will return for the remainder. By this night you should have done background research (from Times-Union or other sources) on who each candidate is, and should be prepared to ask some questions of them. Your story will be due 24 hours later (9 p.m. Tuesday, April 26) and it should be written for local media (Times-Union, StaceyPageNews). This will replace the “board story” requirement in the syllabus.
May 2 – Deb Sprong has re-scheduled to this night for “Literary Journalism.” Be sure to read “Rosa Lee’s Story” and the discussion guide which are posted on the portal. Assuming we have enough time that night, we’ll also have the “shadow-a-reporter” reports (verbal and a written one to hand to me) from Stephen and Zach.
May 9 (final class) – we’ll have the remaining “shadow-a-reporter” reports (Sarah, Josh & Ethan) and your investigative project stories will be due, along with the 10-15 minute verbal reports on your positive experiences, difficulties encountered, and assessment of the worth of this investigative project. We can also discuss Freedom of Information Act material this night.
To: Advanced Newspaper Journalism Students
Re: Revised schedule for the remainder of the semester
We’ve had to do quite a bit of schedule-juggling, but here is how the rest of the semester looks at this point:
Tonight – April 4. Wes Pippert will be with us by Skype (I just talked with him) His chapter is on p. 79 of the Kennedy & Moen book. Please have your questions ready for him. Since he directs the U of Missouri master’s program in journalism in Washington, DC, he may also have some good insights on changes in the newspaper industry, how journalists should be preparing for the future, etc. I hope this will be a stimulating and helpful conversation. In addition to Wes, we’ll try to look at IRE chapters 15 & 16, Stephen will lead us through the investigative reporting chapter (p. 113) in Kennedy & Moen (have your questions), Ethan will review his book “All the President’s Men” and we will try to save at least 45 minutes for critiquing your first drafts of a new story. I think this works best if you bring three copies – one for you and two critiquers, read your story out loud, everyone marks up the copies as you go, and then you discuss.
Next week, April 11 – Zach will lead discussion on “Computer-Assisted Journalism Creates New Knowledge” (p. 127). We’ll discuss IRE chapters 17 & 18, and we’ll discuss how you’re coming on your investigative projects.
April 18 – I’ll lead discussion on “How to Get the Journalism You Deserve” (p. 148) of Kennedy & Moen, and your final copies will be due for the stories you read tonight. We’ll do IRE chapters 19, 20, & 21.
April 25 is Winona Lake Town Council Candidate’s night at the senior center. Class meets at regular time. Candidate meeting starts at 7 p.m., so I’ll take one carload down at 6:30 (save us all seats) and will return for the remainder. By this night you should have done background research (from Times-Union or other sources) on who each candidate is, and should be prepared to ask some questions of them. Your story will be due 24 hours later (9 p.m. Tuesday, April 26) and it should be written for local media (Times-Union, StaceyPageNews). This will replace the “board story” requirement in the syllabus.
May 2 – Deb Sprong has re-scheduled to this night for “Literary Journalism.” Be sure to read “Rosa Lee’s Story” and the discussion guide which are posted on the portal. Assuming we have enough time that night, we’ll also have the “shadow-a-reporter” reports (verbal and a written one to hand to me) from Stephen and Zach.
May 9 (final class) – we’ll have the remaining “shadow-a-reporter” reports (Sarah, Josh & Ethan) and your investigative project stories will be due, along with the 10-15 minute verbal reports on your positive experiences, difficulties encountered, and assessment of the worth of this investigative project. We can also discuss Freedom of Information Act material this night.
Friday, April 1, 2011
Times-Union Editor Invites Commentary
From Gary Gerard, editor of the Times-Union:
Hi Terry,
The picture of the Grace debt clock in today's edition prompted me to drop you a line.
I have a website, dumbhoosier.com. It started out as a place to put my column and links to political websites, but it's grown. Now it has links to the top news stories of the day, a Daily Thought, a national debt ticker, a cost of war ticker, a Google search window, a comment box and an interactive poll question.
Plus -- and here's where your students might be interested -- it has a place where writers can submit opinion columns.
Just e-mail the column and a short bio and I will publish it on the website along with a comment box so others can chime in. All the info needed is on the website. Perhaps some of your students might be interested in having their opinions published online. Any issue is fair game, Grace, local, state, national, world, entertainment, whatever is on their minds. Just thought I'd let you know.
Thanks,
Gary
Hi Terry,
The picture of the Grace debt clock in today's edition prompted me to drop you a line.
I have a website, dumbhoosier.com. It started out as a place to put my column and links to political websites, but it's grown. Now it has links to the top news stories of the day, a Daily Thought, a national debt ticker, a cost of war ticker, a Google search window, a comment box and an interactive poll question.
Plus -- and here's where your students might be interested -- it has a place where writers can submit opinion columns.
Just e-mail the column and a short bio and I will publish it on the website along with a comment box so others can chime in. All the info needed is on the website. Perhaps some of your students might be interested in having their opinions published online. Any issue is fair game, Grace, local, state, national, world, entertainment, whatever is on their minds. Just thought I'd let you know.
Thanks,
Gary
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
