APSE story on Web content

I am particularly surprised at how many of these SEs say that their writers are resisting the Internet, even today. The revolution is over, guys. Print lost. It still has its place, of course, as it did after radio and television came aboard.

Maybe I'm naive, but as a writer, my goal is to be read by the most amount of people, no matter what the medium:

http://apse.dallasnews.com/2006/oct2006/101506hoppes.html

 

Forget the business aspects for a second. Why would writers complain about being given more space, cyber- or otherwise?

 

My only guess is that writers just like to complain about everything.

When I mention "Web" at my shop, even to my editors, you can just see their face wrinkle like they just took a tequila shot.

 

Well, reading the APSE story, I don't think they're resisting the web, they just don't like writing for the web over and over again, with the final draft appearing in print.

 

Maybe it has something to do with with having 500,000 daily readers in print.

And then having to all this extra work -- no extra pay, just extra hours -- so that the webmasters can jack off because your blog got 15,000 hits.

 

Good point. Maybe it just seems sometimes like the Web is so widely read because that's what people on the blogs and message boards react to - Web stories. Then again, those are hardcore Internet users, if they have a blog or frequent a team message board. So that may skew the perception of how vital Web content is.

 

There's a photog in our house who is grumbling because he doesn't get paid extra for web photos.

Dude ... you work for the company, not just the print product.

It is amazing how many writers want no part of the net.

 

It's all just grist for the mill. Stuff in, stuff out.

 

Nature of the beast now.

 

Is it me, or are we not on the web?

 

I dunno why writers would complain about being given more cyber.

Anyhoo, writers should be looking for podcast possibilities and extra things that can run on the Web. Just part of the job nowadays.

 

I've worked both online and in print, so I get it. I also probably understand more about the technology involved than most of my colleagues do.

But if I'm expected to produce a whole bunch of extra web-only content, I'd like to get paid for the extra time required. At some papers, the web-only content is produced by a separate web staff... or at least posted and made to look pretty by one, people with actual tech skills. At a small place like mine, it involves current print-side reporters and photogs doing double duty. We're stretched pretty thin trying to get the paper out right now.

My other, related concern is with website quality. Like Bill Eichenberger, I get my news almost exclusively online. But my own paper's website has trouble handling words and basic photos, let alone audio and video. I know our parent company has plans to dole out funds for equipment, but I haven't heard anything about new people to operate that equipment -- or even proper training!

A lot of people are scared of the tech side of things, and no number of staff meetings is going to change that. But bringing in the toys and letting people play with 'em might help -- as would a raise for those who embrace all of it. Unless the influx of technology is just another excuse to get rid of the old-timers who resist change?