[Seattle-editorial] Proposal: An Insider's Look at The IMC

[Gentry Lange]

I am fine with either adding a new feature, or updating the other.

Adding a new feature keeps the content fresh, and is on topic with a recent
feature. It's a yin-yang, insider, outsider.

Of course this can also be done in one feature, and could make the current
feature better.

Jason's feelings about keeping the quality high and unique and not being a
regular "newswire" should be kept in mind. As Jason wasn't at the last/1st
in while editorial meeting last Tuesday, here's the quick highlights

At the last editorial meeting, we came up with 3 story types:

1. Highlight stories (newswire posts-1 paragraph and a link)
2. Link Features (A more researched editorial piece)
3. Event Highlights (IMC stuff, Authors, Etc)

We also talked about codebase update, and monitoring the newswire

Anyway, Judy has been putting up Highlight Stories, and keeping the newswire
updated, while myself and Jonathan tend to write more Link Features. I am
for both types, and think that having the jist of last weeks meeting kinda
clarifies for me the opposing views on this particular story as it works
either as a Highlight or a Link Feature story. Either way gets my approval.

Regards,

Gentry






-----Original Message-----
From: seattle-editorial-bounces at lists.indymedia.org
[mailto:seattle-editorial-bounces at lists.indymedia.org]On Behalf Of Jason
Reep
Sent: Tuesday, September 09, 2003 12:37 PM
To: Editorial
Subject: Re: [Seattle-editorial] Proposal: An Insider's Look at The IMC


actually, I think that making additions to existing features
(espescially ones that are near the top) is desirable.  I don't want the
Features section to be just anohter newswire where things age off
quickly and are no longer relevant.  I think that there's no reason a
given feature can't remain active for weeks if it's a live story. Also,
woulnd't want to sacrifice the somewhat more crafted and composed
qualities of our features, not that I've written many (any) :)

in this case, the topics are so linked that I think it would be
redundant to create a separate feature.  Isn't it possible to match the
style of the titles for an addition to the existing feature.  In other
words, add a second title to the same feature?

-jason

typist at speakeasy.net wrote:

> Jason,
>
> I've given your proposal to Gentry's some thought.  (I wish we could just
move over the interesting articles without having to call undue attention to
them in the form of subtitles, titles and text; we could have more articles
that way as per other on-line publications.) I think going back and adding
to an article is not worth the effort as it's old news by then and most
people will miss it.
>
> I did consider cutting down the text of the post to give it less
prominance --the amount of text we give things in the center column does
suggest how important we view them.  We could just use
>
> text: In a world of Internet blogging, what is the role of the Indymedia
network?
>
>>><a
>>>href="http://seattle.indymedia.org/front.php3?article_id=32575&group=webc
ast
>>>">Read the Full Story</a>
>
>
>
> Would that work better for you?  Whichever way we go, shorter text or
proposed text, I'm in favor of getting this piece up.  We need to get
something new up everyday.
>
> Judy
>
>
>
>
>>-----Original Message-----
>>From: Jason Reep [mailto:jasonr at speakeasy.net]
>>Sent: Tuesday, September 9, 2003 05:07 PM
>>To: 'Editorial'
>>Subject: Re: [Seattle-editorial] Proposal: An Insider's Look at The IMC
>>
>>How about adding this as an addendum to the outsiders feature instead of
>>  making it it's own.
>>
>>-Jason
>>
>>Gentry Lange wrote:
>>
>>
>>>Now there's a post that hint of controversy in the NYC IMC. Maybe someone
>>>has contacts at the NYC? I'd have questions for them. Isn't Warcry an
>>>Eastcoaster?
>>>
>>>Gentry
>>>
>>>-----Original Message-----
>>>From: seattle-editorial-bounces at lists.indymedia.org
>>>[mailto:seattle-editorial-bounces at lists.indymedia.org]On Behalf Of
>>>Gentry Lange
>>>Sent: Tuesday, September 09, 2003 9:01 AM
>>>To: Editorial
>>>Subject: [Seattle-editorial] Proposal: An Insider's Look at The IMC
>>>
>>>
>>>Well we might as well follow-up an outsider's look with an insider's
look...
>>>Though I don't want to make "about indymedia" stories a frequent
headline...
>>>this story is pretty well written as is..
>>>
>>>Gentry
>>>
>>>
>>>Title: An Insider's Look at Indymedia
>>>Sub: Indymedia in the Blogosphere
>>>
>>>Has Indymedia lost it's uniqueness?  With the growth of interesting,
>>>intelligent, well written weblogs (or blogs) that allow for instantaneous
>>>reader feedback and endless hypertext “linking,” IMC websites can often
>>>appear out-of-date and shrill, merely a small wave in the ocean of froth
>>>that is the worldwide web.
>>>
>>>In a world of Internet blogging, what is the role of the Indymedia
network?
>>>
>>><a
>>>href="http://seattle.indymedia.org/front.php3?article_id=32575&group=webc
ast
>>>">Read the Full Story</a>
>>>
>>>_______________________________________________
>>>Seattle-editorial mailing list
>>>Seattle-editorial at lists.indymedia.org
>>>http://lists.indymedia.org/mailman/listinfo/seattle-editorial
>>>
>>>_______________________________________________
>>>Seattle-editorial mailing list
>>>Seattle-editorial at lists.indymedia.org
>>>http://lists.indymedia.org/mailman/listinfo/seattle-editorial
>>
>>_______________________________________________
>>Seattle-editorial mailing list
>>Seattle-editorial at lists.indymedia.org
>>http://lists.indymedia.org/mailman/listinfo/seattle-editorial
>>
>
>
>

_______________________________________________
Seattle-editorial mailing list
Seattle-editorial at lists.indymedia.org
http://lists.indymedia.org/mailman/listinfo/seattle-editorial