Cone is asking the News & Record to please explain their policies and criteria for what they post on their website.
I have spoken to several folks at the N&R about their haphazard posting practices and none of them can explain it and most are just as frustrated about it as I am. More maddening than trying to figure out their criteria for what articles get the online nod is the how quickly their links rot away only to be re-constituted behind a pay-to-read wall that is so expensive I doubt anyone actually uses it except for very serious research. $2.95 per article is just plain outrageous expecially since every article thay have published in the last decade or so is available for free over at NC Live (password and username required and free with a Greensboro Public Library card) Even though I can't link to those directly either, I can still find out whatever article I want going back at least 10 years - FREE.
Inexplicably there are three subjects that they choose to keep as permalinks. Every article they have ever published on FedEx and Project Homestead is available in a blog-style format - newest to oldest - so they do know how to keep links open. The excellent 2003 series Short Lives, Tragic Deaths by now departed N&R reporter Alex Wayne is available too. Their sports section has a couple of permanent links as well - one to a virtual tour of the new downtown stadium and another to the re-design of Forest Oaks County Club from 09/03. Why? I dunno. Their photo archives selections are just as spartan and incomprehensible as their online article posts.
I get daily updates from the Triad Business Journal, High Point Enterprise and other print publications which also feed me advertising to pay for it all. The N&R doesn't even offer the option for recieving updates. Do they not need the money? or are they askeered that folks might actually visit their website and find out that there isn't normally much news there.
Sunday's edition featured an introspective look at what the N&R's readers thought about their local paper in the Ideas section. (Not posted... of course). There was not a single mention of their online presence or lack thereof except a nod to the fact that news delivery is evolving. They admitted that more and more people get their news online, from cable news and talk radio (no mention of blogs, from which they used to lift a thing or two, but not in the last year or so). They recognize that their role is shifting. Well,... yeah.
I heavily depend upon and enjoy reading the N&R. The paper is delivered to my doorstep every morning and I would never expect, nor want, their website to replace my print edition - but I do expect and want their online presence to compliment their print version - and vice-versa. Someone needs to drag the N&R, kicking and screaming, into the 1990's.
11:03:14 AM  
|