Slashdot Mirror
Chicago Tribune Reporters Don't Want Readers' Pre-Approval
theodp writes "Irked by the Marketing department's solicitation of subscribers' opinions on stories before they were published, 55 reporters and editors at the Chicago Tribune signed an e-mail demanding the practice be stopped. 'It is a fundamental principle of journalism that we do not give people outside the newspaper the option of deciding whether or not we should publish a story, whether they be advertisers, politicians or just regular readers,' the e-mail read."
They're not selling the newspaper, they're selling ad space. The paper isn't the product, you're the product.
Why should the reporters care what you think of their stories? They're here to report, not to butter you up.
If I want news report that aims to please the masses, I'll go watch Fox News.
Or perhaps they have things to say that people don't necessarily want to hear or believe.
No, it's not just having your readers decide the content. It's a stupid marketing idea from people who don't understand the Internet.
Let's say there is some public corruption by a popular political figure. Should an organized group of partisan poll voters be able to spike the story just because they don't want to hear something bad?
If you remember the purpose of newspapers, and journalists generally is to "Comfort the afflicted and afflict the comfortable" you'll understand why you really don't want readers to be able to choose which stories get published any more than you want some multi-national corporation that owns the media outlet to squash a story that shows one of its cronies in a bad light.
Can we agree that not all "Social Network" ideas are worthwhile just because they happen to involve the Internet?
You are welcome on my lawn.
You, sir, are an idiot.