Rocky Mountain News "tweets" dead boy's funeral, now (thankfully) being savaged

I think it would take a company making this shift, not just one or two papers.

If McClatchy or Gannett or Advance announced the move, then really emphasized the paper in their cities, it might work and others might follow suit.

I have read newspapers for 30 years. But if I did not work for one I would not pay to get it tossed in my yard. I would read it online for free and maybe buy the Sunday paper to read after church. Maybe.

 

um, "one or two" have done it, including the vaunted, sainted new york times and that titan, the wall street journal.

wsj still keeps some of their stuff behind a subscription wall, but not much. and the times gave up times select a couple years ago.

as sf said, the barn burned down long ago, and the horses are somewhere out in the rockies.

 

Guys, the solution is not to avoid new technology, it's to figure out the best way to use it.
Embrace the Internet and get the advertisers to do the same (the hard part). Then you can save on ink, paper and press crew and gain readers because you don't have to charge them like we always have for the actual paper.

 

Tweets as his cat?

 

Does Toonces tweet?

 

I apologize for the tone of this post. I'm just frustrated at the direction of this business and the editors and publishers who are guiding it that way. Mr. Temple only serves to reinforce my frustation with his arrogant and insensitive remarks.

I don't think I can work in this profession much longer. I just can't take all the stupidity.

 

Yes, with both hands off the wheel.

 

I wonder how many times this conversation has been had over the history of journalism regarding a newer, faster form of technology, and how many times people have said journalism is "dead" in response to it.

Twitter is extremely useful. It provides an interested audience updates as fast as they can get them. Meanwhile, these types of stories have a large following, many people with an intense connection, whether due to knowing the person, or they have reasons for empathy, etc.

It doesn't seem outrageous to think about putting the two together, on its face. I don't think I would've done it, but only because using it for a funeral never crossed my mind until reading about the backlash, so there wasn't time to honestly first-guess.

Somebody was going to overstep the bounds somewhere with regards to microblogging (since people seem to get hung up on "tweeting"), because whenever somebody finds some way to make something faster, somebody will always push it too far. It's inevitable, and that's why I don't get the angry, vigilante rhetoric with indirect threats of violence.

My first reaction was that it didn't convey a tone nearly somber enough to match the circumstances. That alone would probably make me strike it down immediately, since judging tone is a big part of what writers and editors do.

At the same time, I'm surprised how much the Twitter name affects people's perceptions of the messages sent through it. That I wouldn't have expected, because my instinct would be to consider the site it's appearing on before the technology. Journalists make mistakes with tone all the time, whether it's in stories, headlines, captions or photo choices -- but for some reason, the fact that Twitter is involved really pisses people off here.

I guess that's what I'm taking away from it. Maybe someday people will see Twitter as more than a casual correspondence tool, or maybe a Twitter clone will have a more professional cachet for the same purpose, but obviously the time isn't now.

 

It wasn't the time, it was the place.

 

Well, unless the cat is typing into his own cell phone/blackberry, it's my cousin who writes the updates on his cat's activities.

If it's the cat, though, I think my cousin needs to get the cat an agent.

 

that's a damn smart cat.

 

It's probably easier for the cat. Those phones have some small keys. Perfect for feline feet, though.