| Back to Home > Bulletin Board > Media Issues > Topic: Open Lines Between Writers and Readers? |
Topic: Open Lines Between Writers and Readers?
| Author | Message |
| clairezulkey | Posted – 2/15/2006 5:24:41 PM | show profile | email poster According to Editor and Publisher, ''Last week, the Washington Post began hyperlinking bylines on washingtonpost.com to Web-based e-mail forms. On Tuesday, NYTimes.com will institute a similar feature, which is designed to provide readers with greater access to reporters and columnists without burdening staff with massive amounts of spam e-mails.'' Is this a good idea? Should alll readers have direct access to writers/reporters? Has this helped or hurt you in any way as a writer or reader?'' ------ Editor of MBToolBox |
| clairezulkey | Posted – 2/16/2006 9:41:26 AM | show profile | email poster As a reader, I love having access to reporters (and if you can craft a decent email to a reporter, it could be the start of a beautiful friendship. Not that you should think that way but I've realized it can be pretty rare that reporters get coherent, thoughtful feedback from readers.) However as a writer, I know the cruel sting of being told that somebody wishes we lived in a Communist country so my writing could be suppressed so nobody would have to hear my thoughts on why U2's 2002 Halftime Super Bowl Show sucked (seriously.) ------ Editor of MBToolBox |
| TheNoob | Posted – 2/16/2006 10:03:20 AM | show profile I also think it's great to have reporters' e-mail addresses attached to stories. Sometimes if I really love a story, I'll send a short note telling the person I enjoyed their work. Although I don't send bitchy e-mails (I don't want that to bite me in the booty one day!), I think it shows courage when someone writes something they know will make people mad when they know they'll get a lot of e-mails. When I was working at a newspaper, one woman said she hoped I got eaten by wolves. |
| lenagrove | Posted – 2/16/2006 10:03:38 AM | show profile Well, Claire, at least you're not boring your readers. |
| missit | Posted – 2/16/2006 10:06:21 AM | show profile I think the worth all depends on what is done with the feedback. Granted, not every single email can and should be responded to, but will there even be an attempt, and will justified dissatisfaction with an opinion a reporter espouses, or the way in which a reporter handles a particular topic be seriously considered? For instance, I found myself enraged by a recent article in the NYT (''Street Lit With Publishing Cred: From Prison to a Four-Book Deal'' by Corey Kilgannon) about street lit, complete with a photo of the ex-con turned author's photo selling his book on a charter bus of family and friends of current inmates heading upstate for a visit. While I certainly think there's room for everything, where are the articles talking about literary fiction or serious nonfiction in the African American market, and this article is a recycled article on a subject the Times keeps writing about--street literature, as if this is all African Americans read or should be reading--which is the real message. I tried to google the guy who wrote it, but didn't come up with any contact info to write in to him. Now that this new system is being instituted, I wonder how emails like mine would be received--basically calling irresponsible reporters to the carpet... |
| clairezulkey | Posted – 2/16/2006 11:48:17 AM | show profile | email poster Noob, that's crazy. I almost think we should start a different thread on ''what's the craziest feedback you've ever gotten from a reader?'' I have a friend who does TV recaps and one guy hated her ''Lost'' analysis so much he told her he wished her mother had aborted her. About a TV SHOW! ------ Editor of MBToolBox |
| activeverb | Posted – 2/16/2006 12:21:27 PM | show profile During the technology boom, I wrote for a lot of technology magazines, where this is standard. For one story, a humor column on cyberflirting, I got 200 emails and when I logged on for the next year, I'd get a lot of IMs from being wanted to cyberflirt. But for most stories I got few if any emails. For most reporters, giving email access to readers is fine -- if you're a really popular syndicated columnist, who gets a gadzillion, you'd probably use a special email account, which an assistant would read, send form letter responses, and forward on;y worthwhile letters. I don't see any downside to it, really. |
| willwriteforfood | Posted – 2/16/2006 2:33:08 PM | show profile I think it is great. It keeps us accountable for what we write and I think that is as important as our right to write it. I enjoy getting feedback from readers. I don't get a lot of emails, but most of them are positive. It reminds me that real people are reading my work rather than it just going into oblivion. I've had people take issue with what I have written, and that is fine. I try to explain why I made the comments I did, but it doesn't get to me. I do think that it is good to hear someone elses perspective sometimes. Luckily I haven't had any of the ''eaten by wolves'' emails so far! I have also found I get more hits to my Web site each time I have an article published which in turn often gets me more work, so I'm all for it! |
| belinda | Posted – 2/16/2006 3:42:10 PM | show profile Hasn't there been an open line between reporters and readers since long before e-mail? I'm thinking of all the letters and phone calls I got as a reporter/columnist. Contact is nothing new or novel. |
| clairezulkey | Posted – 2/17/2006 4:47:18 PM | show profile | email poster That's true. Although I think there is something slightly different about email: people feel freer to be more obnoxious sometimes due to the speediness of it and the anonymity. Not that you can't send an anonymous letter but it takes more time at least to send hate mail than hate email. ------ Editor of MBToolBox |
| activeverb | Posted – 2/17/2006 4:53:40 PM | show profile That's like saying the telephone was nothing new or novel -- people could always send a telegram or a messenger. The fact is many readers who won't write a letter or call will email, so it can substantially change things. <<Hasn't there been an open line between reporters and readers since long before e-mail? I'm thinking of all the letters and phone calls I got as a reporter/columnist. Contact is nothing new or novel.<< |
| belinda | Posted – 2/17/2006 6:23:34 PM | show profile As of five years ago, when I last held a staff job, open e-mail and printing staff e-mail addresses as taglines didn't change anything. Heck, my e-mail address still runs with a self-syndicated column; I haven't had a single wacko e-mail in four years. At the staff job, I edited two popular sections for a top-10-circ mainstream newspaper. There was no inundation by e-mail. I would have wished for fewer press releases, as they were a PITA to print out and collect from the communal printer. Oddly enough, readers still wrote letters. This was in Silicon Valley, so we're not talking about readers with lack of access to e-mail. They could have e-mailed. But the difference this time is not e-mail; it is the e-mail form. That's something my paper didn't have five years ago. If it makes a difference in what gets into the e-mail system, the form is significant in that way. Claire, you might get a different, relevant POV from big newspapers' IT people. They're the ones dealing with spam filters and viruses. I'm certain they'd welcome anything making that chore easier. An e-mail submission form would seem like a great help in that regard. |
| clairezulkey | Posted – 3/7/2006 3:34:36 PM | show profile | email poster This chat is old and I'm going to put up a new one soon enough but I thought this was an interesting article to wrap things up: http://journalism.nyu.edu/pubzone/blueplate/issue1/robinson_profile/ ------ Editor of MBToolBox |
