An e-mail from a former Sun staffer who wonders about the rush to the Internet:
"Hey TSF,
I thought you'd enjoy this: A tragic story handled as ineptly as possible - the logical result of PKP's belief you can drive readers online, yet not provide any resources (read: experienced editors/writers) for that online platform.
Take a look at this screen capture for 8 feared dead in avalanche.
I don't know what's worse:
1. The kicker: Victims buried under snow. Gee, that's so unusual in an avalanche.
2. The first bullet: Some snowmbilers (sic) dead. Vague, with added typo!
3. A picture of a lovely green meadow with towering mountains, with just a trace of snow in the background. Um, if you're going to use a file shot, maybe one from winter would be advisable.
As a former Sun staffer who was constantly told we're cutting staff in newsrooms to populate the website, only to see the website understaffed by the cheapest staff possible, front pages like this seem like poetic justice. Obviously, you do get what you pay for.
Cheers!"
"Hey TSF,
I thought you'd enjoy this: A tragic story handled as ineptly as possible - the logical result of PKP's belief you can drive readers online, yet not provide any resources (read: experienced editors/writers) for that online platform.
Take a look at this screen capture for 8 feared dead in avalanche.
I don't know what's worse:
1. The kicker: Victims buried under snow. Gee, that's so unusual in an avalanche.
2. The first bullet: Some snowmbilers (sic) dead. Vague, with added typo!
3. A picture of a lovely green meadow with towering mountains, with just a trace of snow in the background. Um, if you're going to use a file shot, maybe one from winter would be advisable.
As a former Sun staffer who was constantly told we're cutting staff in newsrooms to populate the website, only to see the website understaffed by the cheapest staff possible, front pages like this seem like poetic justice. Obviously, you do get what you pay for.
Cheers!"
You might also note the filename of Duffy's picture here.
ReplyDeletehttp://cnews.canoe.ca/CNEWS/Politics/2008/12/22/7827636-cp.html
Been like that for almost a week.
A lot of the online content - both at Canoe and the individual papers - is poorly (or not) edited, often by junior/inexperienced staffers or multitasking deskers who also have a paper to get out. The heds also reflect that weakness. There is a rush to publish and "throw it up online" as the priority, rather than aiming for crisp, accurate, quality copy.
ReplyDeleteI'm an ex-Canoe employee. The *news* room up there is more interested in shilling click throughs via misleading headlines under the promise of compelling content - nine times out of ten of which are entirely unsatisfying and inappropriate wire stories.
ReplyDeleteIt's no wonder Canoe is a laughing stock in the online community. It might work in Montreal, but staffing the management of the english Canada office with people who have no real clue as to what the internet is, let alone how it really works isn't really the best way to deliver a decent service.