Why do you blog for your newspaper?

Cosmo, you are one of the lucky ones. I think all of our writers, even the cat with 100 bylines a year, work harder. Between blogs, regular duties and several other intangibles, the news cycle almost never ends for a major beat these days.

I think most of our writers could care less if their copy is in print because they only read the web and their stories also do not get cut on the web or are cut less.

I will also say that the person who does not blog generally gets more space in the paper because he does not have an online presence. So if he has some news it usually goes in print whereas some other writers might have the same info but it goes in their blog.

 

I guess I'm saying that some of the stuff that used to go in the print edition goes straight online now. We have so little space for notebooks and such that things I used to write for print ends up in the blog, and the two feed off each other.

 

Sometimes blogging can help writers - and editors - hone their language skills.

The difference between There, Their and They're, for instance.

 

Just because there is no direct financial compensation for doing the work doesn't mean it isn't noticed or a factor when other newspapers or web sites are looking to make hires.

When ESPNBoston.com was looking to make a Patriots hire, do you think they hire somebody who doesn't have a highly successful Patriots blog and chats? Of course not. So while Mike Reiss may not have been directly compensated from The Globe for that work, it was noticed and played a role in him getting a better job.

 

If anyone are only making $0.10/thousand hits on their web site, they are being robbed blind. Even the cheapest ads out there should be paying $2/thousand, easily. Newspapers should be getting more like $10-20.

 

The money shot

 

VJ

Maybe if Reiss was directly compensated for his work at the Globe he wouldn't have to go to ESPNBoston.com. Perhaps that is all part of the problem.

The people saying don't pay bloggers for blogging for your paper are the same ones who will be attending going-away parties for those bloggers when they leave.

 

Oh noes, a journalist might leave? Where we will ever find a replacement in such a tough, employee-friendly job market

 

So Rick you think it's great that Reiss left and the Globe has to replace one of its best reporters or what?

 

You asked Rick, but I think any writer would rather make the leap for more money and more exposure than to stay at the current location.

ESPNBoston is just one part of the equation. If Reiss does quality work, he now has the platform for instant national recognition via ESPN's gigantic network. Someone in Butte, Montana can see his work and be familiar with it. Sure, the Globe or the Times or the Post are gigantic newspapers, but they don't have that type of reach and familiarity.

Besides, there are numerous quality reporters without a job right now. I'm sure the Globe was buried in applications.

 

I don't think it's great. But I don't see anything wrong with the newspaper acting in its best interest in offering pay, and Reiss finding a better offer. That's just life.

 

I'm just not getting the jist of this whole argument here. The blog is part of the newspaper's web site, owned by the newspaper, which you work for. Why wouldn't you be obligated to post a blog if that's what your bosses want. The blog is an extension of the paper. The paper pays you to write. Am I dense here?