[CIMC-work] Editorial policy and the offending graphic

[Garth Liebhaber]

Hey gang, 
not to thwart what may be necesary discussion, but can 
we try to come to a consensus so Don may respond to 
Dan in a timely manner?

cheerio!
garth                

Don Wrote:                        
Unfortunately, I will be in Cleveland on 
Sunday and will be unable to
 attend the C-IMC meeting.  
 
 Since one of the topics will be our response to Dan LB's 
message, I'll
 summarize what I might have contributed to that.
 
 1. Dan deserves a response
   a. we should acknowledge the unfortunate effect of the 
(automatic)
      display of the graphic on the front page and out-of-
context.
   b. we should decline to remove the graphic, for the 
reasons that Dick and
      I have expressed in earlier messages -- assuming that 
we reach
      consensus on that.
   c. we should thank him for his thoughtful message to 
us.
 
    I'm willing to draft such a response before I leave for 
Cleveland, if
    that is desired.
 
 2. I'm opposed to removing or hiding the graphic, 
especially since it (very
    probably) will no longer appear on the front page.
 
 3. I think we should take this opportunity to examine our 
editorial policy
    and the process we use in difficult cases.  I do think 
that the process
    IS working in this instance -- I think we all learn from 
the exchange
    and (if my perception of the discussion is correct) we 
have reached, or
    are reaching, a consensus which will serve us well in 
the future.
 
 4. We should pursue (low priority) a technical solution to 
the
    out-of-context display of graphics on the front page 
"Media Gallery"
    teaser 
 
 --Don



Protect your right to breathe clean, smoke-free air:
http://www.care2.com/go/z/11238/1043