Comments on: Why journalists have to promote their work http://www.lostremote.com/2007/04/05/why-journalists-have-to-promote-their-work/ Where TV Finds the Future Sun, 07 Sep 2008 03:34:11 +0000 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.5.1 By: Jason http://www.lostremote.com/2007/04/05/why-journalists-have-to-promote-their-work/#comment-268511 Jason Thu, 05 Apr 2007 21:18:14 +0000 http://www.lostremote.com/2007/04/05/why-journalists-have-to-promote-their-work/#comment-268511 No one's a better salesperson for my stories than I am. I will post on message boards, comment in people's blogs, generate my own blog posts -- whatever it takes to get the message out there. I'd argue that it increases the quality of my journalism. Right now I have a post on the mainpage of our website looking for people to be in my 10pm news story. I've posted on MNSpeak (dot-com) about it. If you promote during the process, often you end up with better work because your viewers help craft your story. No one’s a better salesperson for my stories than I am. I will post on message boards, comment in people’s blogs, generate my own blog posts — whatever it takes to get the message out there.

I’d argue that it increases the quality of my journalism. Right now I have a post on the mainpage of our website looking for people to be in my 10pm news story. I’ve posted on MNSpeak (dot-com) about it. If you promote during the process, often you end up with better work because your viewers help craft your story.

]]> By: Cory http://www.lostremote.com/2007/04/05/why-journalists-have-to-promote-their-work/#comment-268494 Cory Thu, 05 Apr 2007 20:59:22 +0000 http://www.lostremote.com/2007/04/05/why-journalists-have-to-promote-their-work/#comment-268494 Yes, I agree it will reduce the quality of journalism. By a little. But if we don't do this, revenue will drop, we'll bleed resources, and the quality of journalism will drop much, much further. You raise a terrific point that the structure behind all this -- how we're organized in newsrooms today -- needs to change as we add more required tasks. Yes, I agree it will reduce the quality of journalism. By a little. But if we don’t do this, revenue will drop, we’ll bleed resources, and the quality of journalism will drop much, much further.

You raise a terrific point that the structure behind all this — how we’re organized in newsrooms today — needs to change as we add more required tasks.

]]> By: Adam http://www.lostremote.com/2007/04/05/why-journalists-have-to-promote-their-work/#comment-268366 Adam Thu, 05 Apr 2007 18:41:54 +0000 http://www.lostremote.com/2007/04/05/why-journalists-have-to-promote-their-work/#comment-268366 Let me play devil's advocate; is it possible that the distractions of promotion and feeding more mouths in the same window of time it used to take to turn a single story is degrading the quality of journalism? If that is remotely possible where is the line and do we risk losing viewers by trying to find more? I completely agree that there needs to be a different way to look at how we pollinate the landscape with our stories but over extending as an individual journalist (particularly on deadline) creates some major risks. I'll finish with the Michael Rosenblum scenario. He has espoused changing the model and expanding the amount of reporters (by enabling photographers to report) in local newsrooms. In turn the reporters would have more time to turn stories and different versions thereof for TV, web, promo, mobile... whatever. Thats a pretty interesting idea. But when we maintain the same model that's existed for the last 25 years and try to cram exponentially more tasks into the structure... well, I think tTHAT'S old thinking. I have to stop blogging now and edit a package. Let me play devil’s advocate; is it possible that the distractions of promotion and feeding more mouths in the same window of time it used to take to turn a single story is degrading the quality of journalism? If that is remotely possible where is the line and do we risk losing viewers by trying to find more?
I completely agree that there needs to be a different way to look at how we pollinate the landscape with our stories but over extending as an individual journalist (particularly on deadline) creates some major risks.
I’ll finish with the Michael Rosenblum scenario. He has espoused changing the model and expanding the amount of reporters (by enabling photographers to report) in local newsrooms. In turn the reporters would have more time to turn stories and different versions thereof for TV, web, promo, mobile… whatever. Thats a pretty interesting idea. But when we maintain the same model that’s existed for the last 25 years and try to cram exponentially more tasks into the structure… well, I think tTHAT’S old thinking.
I have to stop blogging now and edit a package.

]]>