Deadspin's investigation into Toledo's cross country coach

In the middle of this little pissing match, I thought Toledo's executive editor had an excellent, balanced take:
http://jimromenesko.com/2013/02/13/toledo-blade-editor/

 

Then he kills it with this bit of fantasy:

"I don’t view this issue as old vs. new media, but rather, more traditional media finding a way to gain equal footing with a growing online, up-to-the minute reporting."

This would have been a really interesting take in 2002.

 

I care less in the new vs. old (you're right, that's so 2002), and more about his acknowledgement that each outlet has a different audience, each is limited in its own way, but between the two they were able to provide the complete story. Ultimately, a service to readers.

 

Who are the readers with the desire to read both stories?

 

Those who are really intrigued by the story. Why wouldn't a person who was brought in by the Deadspin treatment go to the Blade for the potential for more information? There are still people at newspapers that do good work, you know.

 

The stories don't cross-promote. How would Deadspin readers know to go to the Blade? How would Blade readers know to go to Deadspin?

How do you convince readers who have already read one story that yours has enough in it that the other doesn't?

 

Of course there's no cross-promotion, but I would think if someone is curious enough about a story, he'll want to see what the hometown news source has. I'm sure the Toledo Blade is eminently findable online. It's not a matter of effort by anybody, and there'll be folks who stop at one news source. But those who don't will better serve their informational interests.

 

And what about the Blade's readers? They miss plenty of details because they have no reason to think Deadspin would have more on the story.

 

The Deadspin story was a bit overlong and I got what I needed to know before I scrolled down to the Text conversations.

Finding the Blade after that was an effort that wouldn't have been worth it to me.

In addition, the hometown paper almost always has a relationship with the sources the national outlet doesn't. The hometown paper wants to sustain those relationships.

It is more likely a Deadspin or an ESPN eats the lunch of the local outlet, than vice versa.

 

I'm sure those readers have heard of Deadspin and have places they visit on the Net that would have a mention of that coverage. Again, if they're interested enough in the story. Of course, there are people who won't visit Deadspin on principle, and people who won't visit a newspaper site.

 

How many people are that interested? We're talking about two seemingly comprehensive stories.

I also don't think it's ingrained in the modern reader to go check out other places for more on the story, when they are at a place that is basically claiming to break the story.

 

Last I counted, about 25,419.