New York Times 2020 Report

And I've done the Google map thing. We started charting OU, OSU and TU football recruits years ago, which was where I started learning it. But for most maps like they're talking about, a traditional reporter is more likely just going to provide the graphics department with the information for it and let them handle it. I know some papers, esp. smaller shops with fewer people, that make use of Google maps a lot because reporters with just a little training can knock out a basic map pretty quick, but I can't imagine the Times spending time training reporters in that just so they can get something to the graphics people. The idea is to get the visual people involved in different levels, including as editors, so they can say, "Not much for the graphics department here, but we definitely need a locator map. Be sure to get an assignment in."

 

Does trolling the New York Times mean one has reached the pinnacle in digital trolling?

 

Oh for Christ sake get the F over yourself dude.

 

Guess so.

 

Yeah, I knew citing any examples would lead to frothing. I guess it's better to just make general, pithy comments about CHANGE!, etc.

The Google idea was just one of potentially many. Providing information to the graphics people would be another, but I also would like to think that is something that already happens. It would seem kind of, you know, pointless to suggest things that are already being done.

I guess I fail to see how, aside from one camp "winning" the battle, it would accomplish many meaningful long-term goals to do what has now been a TSPE suggestion for 2-3 pages now. (Whatever that is. We're "involving" visual people at different levels. Different presentation formats, different methods, etc.) The whole idea is to be ahead of the curve and not to follow the same path of predecessors who are now using design hubs. I guess the Times wouldn't go that route, but you'd think there might be some fresher ideas in the Big Apple. I guess not.

But I should update the goal list. We're protecting the writer's voice. We're involving the visual people at different levels. And we're adding diversity. The path to success is clear.

 

We'll send a text the next time real frothing occurs.

 

Light frothing.

While we're making inferences: Another of the many things being missed here is -- and this is right from the report -- staffers including reporters say they want to be trained on other platforms. So I don't think they want to keep the same skills but then have some "visual experts" covering parts of their beat.

Even if that inference is totally wrong, this is a process that has been tried, and it has not worked. Maybe the Times has more resources and can do it better, and it will work better than it has elsewhere. I think it would be better to try something else.

 

I know around here, we have some who are eager to learn video and photo stuff but not so much graphics. Others want to learn to use different things like Tableau to enhance data reporting but don't want to do video. Others want to learn it all. The problem with that kind of thing at the New York Times level is that with a lot of that stuff, unless you're immersed in it, you won't get past a certain level of skill, and people are going to expect a lot more from the Times than they do from the Podunk Tribune. And you still have the issue that some people are just wired/brought up to think differently than others, so the visual side of things doesn't come as naturally to them. There's a certain amount of that stuff that can be taught and some that is more instinct.

 

The data reporting is kind of the same issue. I recall reporters going to those seminars, coming back with great ideas, and then ... very little.

Again, I assume the Times would utilize those resources better. It would have been good to see more about that in the report.

 

https://www.nytimes.com/2017/02/04/...iting-in-the-digital-era.html?ref=todayspaper

 

I like turtles

 

This has been the Newsroom Way for at least 30 years, to my personal knowledge. Nobody pisses on change more or harder than newsroom employees. Because the way things are being done now is working so well.