« Real men (and women) don’t use leaf-blowers | Main | A walk along Casco Bay »
November 16, 2005
Q & A
We have received plenty of feedback about the new look of the Monitor. A couple of readers responded to this blog, some wrote notes that we published and a few made comments not for publication. There were questions embodied in many comments, and here are answers to a few of them:
The paper has more to see and less to read. Haven’t you dumbed down your content?
That certainly was not our intention. The driving idea behind the redesign was just the opposite. We wanted to create an environment that allowed good content to sell itself. That is, we wanted the words, pictures and information graphics to take predominance over color and graphics used in an ornamental or decorative way.
We have encouraged editors and reporters to present information in new ways, but we’re trying to do two things at once: allow busy readers to get more from the paper at a glance without sacrificing the in-depth reporting on state and local issues that only a local newspaper can provide.
Why don’t you put important national and international news on the front and most of the local content elsewhere in the paper?
We pay a lot of attention to national and international news, but as a job candidate once said in a critique, and I paraphrase: It’s clear from reading the Monitor that page one is a showcase for local and state news while Bush and Saddam can duke it out on page A-2 or even further into the A section.
We hope our nation-world report is smart and extensive. For a small newspaper, we devote a lot of space to it. We are also quick to move nation-world stories out front when the news warrants it. But local and state news remain the Monitor’s franchise.
Why so much focus on disease and death in the first week of the redesign?
Our redesign is content-driven. We have created three new beats after speaking with readers and assessing our content. The beats are aging, health care and the environment, subjects that seemed under-covered in our local report. We planned several stories for the first week of redesign – last week – to highlight our new beats. Meanwhile, Beverly Leo, whose decline we had been following in a continuing series, died the day before the redesign debuted. This, I think, led to the impression among some readers that we had too much “gloomy” news on the front page during the week.
We hope readers won’t judge us on the basis of any particular week’s content.
What happened to the Sunday political column?
Capital Beat remains a staple of the Sunday Viewpoints page. At the moment we are between State House reporters. Dan Barrick, who covered the State House, has been promoted to a local editing position. Eric Moskowitz, our Concord reporter, is moving to the State House. Sarah Liebowitz will cover the city. Eric will soon be reporting and writing Capital Beat. Sarah will take over Eric’s City Limits column.
p.s. More questions welcome, here or at letters@cmonitor.com
Posted by Mike Pride at November 16, 2005 10:09 AM
Comments
A wonderful metaphor for the passing of so much in life.
A Chicago native, I've lived in South Florida for 18 years. I long to rake leaves again and to embrace the different kind of beauty that winter brings.
But I feel another kind of fall and winter coming. Well into middle age, I hope to embrace and live out those seasons soon as a permanent resident of New Hampshire.
By the way, I'm a journalist too. I love the paper and have subscribed to it twice before. Now, especially with the redesign, it's time to renew. Keep up the great work.
Posted by: Terry Sheridan at November 17, 2005 08:59 AM
You say you want more attention to be paid to the words, but then you have a headline that reads: "Report: Men need some help." That one is an instant classic in the "What were they thinking?" category.
Posted by: Robert Knilands at November 20, 2005 01:13 AM