APSE judging thread

Heck, rightly or wrongly, *we* allot for that "big-paper" spacing for quite a few things here. Now, an ordinary prep gamer? 15-16 inches. But the U. of Podunk's football tilts? 25-30. And we published a really, REALLY strong feature a little while back that was just shy of 100 inches. Read like 20.

rb

 

There's a lot of talent out there.

 

And Sullivan makes four.

 

Ryan Sonner makes the list. So there.

 

Damn. Nice grab, HH.
Congrats to The Greatest!

 

You bet Ryan Sonner made the list. The list sure as hell didn't make Ryan Sonner.

 

Congratulations to all the winners, especially those in the smaller classifications, whose good work is not often acknowledged far and wide.

To me, these awards, in general, could use an overhaul.

There is, for starters, no acknowledgment of a newspaper's online presentation(s). There needs to be acknowledgement of top-flight display and photography. It's a topic discussed a lot here.

The section ratings aren't as pertinent as they used to be -- I see newspapers from all over the country, and Sunday sections aren't as distinguishable from daily sections as they used to be.

I'd actually like to see the special sections award given to papers who produce several good sections, not just one.

I'd also like to see the individual awards salute sustained excellence, not just one story, kind of like the Pulitzers. Rather than a classification for news story, there needs to be a category for beat or specialty reporting, the meat-and-potatoes of this business. You don't have to be a pro beat writer to be a good beat writer; there are a lot of really good high school writers.

Finally, I'd rank the sections like they rank the writers. That would be interesting, wouldn't it? I don't think the editors would go for it.

 

Ike's ideas aren't bad, but I thought of a couple of things.

1. It seems hard enough for APSE to get enough judges to cover the categories they currently have.

2. Ranking the sections used to done. But then some managing editors began to hold sports editors accountable to the ranking each year. Wasn't a good situation.

 

You are going to need a ton more judges and a ton more time to judge.
There never will be a perfect solution but I give props to APSE in looking at alternatives.
Online content judging is possible for the future but I believe it's a few years down the road.

 

With as many papers that are pushing reporters to file online-only stories, notebooks, blogs, etc. -- I don't see how it could be too far off.

 

Well, you have to establish contest categories.
Best blog?
Best multimedia presentation?
Best podcast?
Best online HS all-star photo site?
See?

 

You're exactly right. Just saying ... I know quite a few columnists (who make 10 times what I make) and some of their stuff is ONLY appearing online. I can't imagine those big names are gonna continue to let their hard work go unnoticed just because it's online. Ya know?