I see they're plumping today for a shorter week for the Postal Service on their editorial page. I guess they want some company circling the drain.

I bought a hard copy of the "O" Friday, my first one in many months. I found it very interesting at the bottom of each article printed there was a statement "For more on this story, go to www.orgonlive dot com. Now that's what I call great advertisement, no wonder their subscription is falling.

They might try getting rid of the editorial slant in their news stories.

Thanks
JK

If they are serious about moving into the digital age, they had better do something about their website. Maybe they should copy someone else's.

Re. "For More On This Story", they are all doing that now. You're screwed if you don't have access to a computer or the internet. Television news anchors and reporters and the O either erroneously assume that everyone is wired or they just don't care about those who aren't.

Ironically, sometimes the news they're squirreling away on their website and not making available on TV news or the printed paper is exactly what the people least likely to be hooked into the internet need to know.

For example, during an extreme weather event when there were warming shelters throughout town, the news anchor on whatever station was broadcasting in our living room announced that there were shelters and to online to find out where they were.

Big help. And even if you can get to the O'd website, it can be pretty difficult to track down the information if it's not right there on the first page or at the top of the list on one of the tablinks.

"There are several comments about this on my Facebook wall. Here’s what the Oregonian’s Joseph Rose writes:

I can tell you that The O’s newsroom is as vigilant as ever about watchdog journalism. If you need those values to be printed on a card in order to live them, you’re doing this journalism thing all wrong. I just spent eight months on an investigation into sleeping public-transit bus drivers, with the editors and the newspaper’s management standing unflinchingly behind me with whatever I needed — every step of the way.

* Earlier: Oregonian memo describes a beat reporter’s digital day (jimromenesko.com)"

(I don't see at the link what is being spoofed. It has strategy spelled correctly, only there's a typo at a missing apostrophe for the possessive newspaper's customers or somesuch.)

A grousing iconoclast (i.e. curmudgeon's) bombast about newspapering on this stony rude rightwing website. Or about reporters, I forget.

The Fall of Journalism, By Theodore Dawes, January 31, 2013

In the past 30-plus years I've interviewed dozens of candidates for jobs in journalism. Among the questions I always posed is this one: Why are newspapers published?

To date, no journalism school graduate has known the answer, which is, of course, to make money for the publisher.

Last year I participated in a get-together with journalism students from the local college. I asked my question and received the same b.s. answers as always ("To... uh... provide the community with a voice?")

When I told the students the answer, the instructor disagreed and repeated the same nonsense his students had already provided.

Mine was a common sense observation, gently delivered. As a friend of mine recently wrote, "If you want to see heads explode, try explaining to people that they are NOT the customer and the newspaper is NOT the product ... advertisers are the customer and reader attention is the product."

Dawes might have asked the students to look in a mirror and report what they see.

Mr. Tensk: if rightwing self-righteousness is cynical, what is leftwing self-righteousness? Smug?