1. Welcome to SportsJournalists.com, a friendly forum for discussing all things sports and journalism.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register for a free account to get access to the following site features:
    • Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
    • Access to private conversations with other members.
    • Fewer ads.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!

LAT goal: "A 24/7 operation that breaks news all the time online"

Discussion in 'Journalism topics only' started by Idaho, Jan 24, 2007.

  1. Idaho

    Idaho Active Member


    And, yes. They will need more, not fewer, resources to pull it off.
  2. tyler durden 71351

    tyler durden 71351 Active Member

    Interesting. I think they're way ahead of the curve for all this.
    Five years from now, I think a major news organization will sign a deal to provide exclusive content for Yahoo or AOL or Google or You Tube, or whatever the hot portal or device is. And the daily newspaper or prime time newscast will be more about investigative work, big picture analysis, opinion and well crafted features.
  3. Piotr Rasputin

    Piotr Rasputin New Member

    Wasn't there a recent agreement between the Singleton people and some Web dudes to do something similar to what Mr. Durden just said?

    I also think the Times is wise to do this. The Orange County Register has many of its writers do podcasts for the sports they cover, while the Times has extra stories and blogs. The possibilities with the Web are enormous and go way beyond just posting stories and blogs; time for the Times to catch up to what others have done.

    Yes, they'll need more resources. But at least they're giving their vets a chance to learn the new ways.
  4. AliceBrenda

    AliceBrenda Member

    Won't happen. From the story:
    "We will need to divert some resources to this effort at a time when no one is going to give us any more resources," O'Shea said. "If anything, we might be looking at less."
  5. FishHack76

    FishHack76 Active Member

    I wholeheartedly agree. You need more resources, and I have a bad feeling that most newspapers won't do that. To me, they should invest in this, and by invest, you put money into something to try to make it work the RIGHT WAY.
    Otherwise, in some cases, you're going to have overworked people (24 hour shifts, anyone?) putting out something half-assed. The public will look at it like the floating turd that it is and go back to Yahoo and Google. I think what newspapers have going for them on the internet is their name, and that name represents reputable information. I think that's what some random blog can't really give you. They don't have that trust factor, but if newspaper companies nap, it won't be long before they catch up in that race.
    Believe me, the Times is not "woefully behind" the competition. There are still places that are even farther back than they are in this race. I used to work at one of those places. I know it's going to take them at least three years to get to the point where some newspaper websites are now.
    That's because they don't invest in anything either.
  6. tapintoamerica

    tapintoamerica Well-Known Member

    As someone who has never been in a union and knows nothing certain about them, I have this question to those who do know: At what point can a union step in and prohibit management from requiring print reporters from doing twice the work for the same pay? Is there any language in existing contracts that suggests this sort of movement is in violation? Again, I'm ignorant.
  7. The LAT is actually way behind breaking news on its Web site. Some major dailies have been doing this for quite a while: WP, NYT, etc. From what I've heard, the LAT's brass has been seeking advice nationally for months about how to implement a stronger Web presence.
  8. Michael_ Gee

    Michael_ Gee Well-Known Member

    Union contracts specify how MANY hours an employee must work (otherwise, there's overtime, comp time, etc.). How full those hours are is entirely up to management. At the Herald, we were all routinely expected to do twice the work, be it writing or editing, as our better-staffed Globe counterparts.
    A 24 hour news service requires three shifts of employees. This isn't going to happen. The Times is just throwing out corporate gibberish in the hopes of fooling someone.
    Note: I actually think the plan the Times described is a good one. They're just not going to carry it out.
  9. Johnny Dangerously

    Johnny Dangerously Active Member

    The head of our online operations (which are way behind the times -- and The Times) says the trick is have a publisher who throws away the eight-hour work shift and puts all employees on a 24-hour shift. She says that's how they operate. Essentially, you're on call, with the latitude that you don't have to be chained to a regular schedule or to your desk.
  10. fishwrapper

    fishwrapper Active Member

    The LA Times is non-union.
    I just had a vision of Otis Chandler spinning in the grave with the simple mention.
  11. Football_Bat

    Football_Bat Well-Known Member

    If you're on salary, isn't that just business as usual?
  12. Left_Coast

    Left_Coast Active Member

    Sounds like people who work for AP.
Draft saved Draft deleted

Share This Page