Observer Content Discussion

[Jim O'Bryan]

To date we have had over 3% of the population write for the paper.

Jim,

I am not sure I understand this. 3% would be something like 1600 wouldn't it? Are you talking about the paper alone or are you including the blog? Thanks for clarifying.

Ryan

I could be wrong. I will go back and check but as of a couple months ago we had surpassed, 1,300+ people taking part in the paper version.

With unique IP Address, we have passed 1/4 of the city with more than 1.5% signed in.

Our hits are on average 2,000,000 a month, and climbing. With page views past 1,000,000.

When we started this we were assured by some in Lakewood groups to no be disappointed if we can not get to 1%.

With the paper in runs of 12,000 to 17,000 depedning on issue and season. No one covers Lakewood better.

Clarification - We have no written blogs. Though we offered them for free, everyone decided the FORUM was the way to go. We do offer photo blogs.

The reason I get touchy on this is that many have used "open source" and or "citizen journalism." This is what the sun and PD are desperately trying to do. The Lakewood Observer, with our team, and our proprietary software have defined our product as "Civic journalism." Meaning people with a vested stake in a city take part.

This is a big difference from other boards.

What defines this project is the city, our residents, and our software.

I promise you will here more of this in the coming month. From many more places than the Lakewood Observer.


.

[dl meckes]

I have never worked in a newspaper, but it seems they would have an editrorial board for each department debating what to print and how to place it. They don't typically have a bunch of people out taking pictures then posting it on the internet.

The Lakewood Observer project does not follow the traditional newspaper model and the Observation Deck is frequently used to break news because the paper is published bi-monthly. This was part of the model from the beginning.

The Observation Deck was viewed as an opportunity to feed the newspaper, amplify what was published in the newspaper, get into more depth than could be handled in the newspaper and stand alone as a forum.

[Gary Rice]

Mr. Scott,

I hope you have noticed that the people responding to you appear to have been far more explanatory than critical.

You are welcome on this 'Deck, and you are welcome to write and submit photos.

Like you, I am troubled by disturbing photographs. There are tense and raw feelings involved, made all the moreso by the fact that these are friends and neighbors who are affected.

Having written that thought though, I must tell you that I've been a news reporter and photographer on and off since junior high. The worst possible thing for the public, in my opinion, would be to be kept from the truth- whether by not being informed of events around them, or having those events filtered through some oligarchical group, whether governmental, ideologically, or otherwise driven.

With this newspaper/online interaction, a different kind of journalism is emerging. At once democratic in the extreme, it is also utterly accountable to the person on the street.

It has been my personal experience that the participants of this experiment in citizen journalism have been most professional in their approach to news around town. Particularly so, the photographers.

If the event is troubling, how can the photos be otherwise?

No one is "playing" journalist and photographer here.

This is for real. Every thought we express, every photo we post, all becomes part of living, virtually organic Lakewood history.

Even yours.

What else is on your mind that we all might need to hear about?

[David Scott]

My original comment regarded 3-4 people taking pictures of a bad situation and then posting them, some were inbedded in a post and you had no choice to see them. I questioned the taste and the motivation. As for the taste, in my opinion it is intrusive and decorum should be shown. As for the motivation, I don't know, I feel that they were hoping for the guy to shoot his brains out or the police to shoot him so they could get the "money" shot. The other option was to be informative, but a few pictures posted with tact can tell the story. It just seems sensationalist and I keep hearing this is a newspaper. There have been about half a dozen situations in Lakewood in the past year that have involved the Police and a dragged out confrontation and it just seems like a few guys get a thrill out of being there and getting the pictures. I just don't see it. Whate happens when they interfere with the Police because they are not trained or experienced. Plus, my main focus is that it is intrusive on a family's sorrow, so if my family ever has this situation - stay far away and let us handle this in private. Don't practice "citizen journalism" without trained and experienced journalists. Go cover your street fairs and business openings, but don't try to make me believe that journailistic standards are being followed. You can have all the doctors and lawyers writing for you, but if they are not writing on their expertise just because they're educated doesn't make them journalists. Otherwise, why don't you have a lawyer perform your next surgery. Again, the attempt at belittling is the problem. You guys want to play journalist, go ahead - just watch the tact. I just don't get it. Editorials are run as if they were articles and we are supposed to accept it. When I travel I love to read the New York Post or the Chicago Sun Times, but I know what I'm getting.

[Stan Austin]

Mr. Scott--- I take personal offense at your whole take on our endeavor. If you don't like it, don't read it.

But let me specifically reply to one of your broad smear accusations-- that we don't care about the sensibilities of people involved.

Suffice to say, prior to any post or article in the printed version of the Lakewood Observer, if there is any possibility of the bounds of common courtesy or decency being breached, a series of phone consultations is made among a number of people to explore a specific situation.

I am extremely proud to be a part of this effort and, frankly, think that the main stream media should be looking to us as a model of excellence and minding the community's sensibilities.

I think you should apply those standards to yourself and try and put out constructive criticism, which we all welcome.

Stan Austin

[Dee Martinez]

Mr. O'Bryan and Mr. Austin.

I applaud the efforts you are making. However, this exchange makes two things perfectly clear.
One is that no matter what the media or who is doing it, some folks will complain about it.
The second is that the people RESPONSIBLE for that media will rise indignantly to their own defense.
Mr. Austin your posts are very informative and measured and I look to them as a source of good information. But your response to Mr. Scott could have come directly from the mouth of the Plain Dealer editor-in-chief. Read it again.

For my part I believe that whatever goes on in the forum is fair game. I dont look to the news sections of the Observer much because the line between "news" and "news release" is a little to blurry for me.

As worthy as the Observer is, it should NOT be immune to criticism. Otherwise its "meet the new boss, same as the old boss"

[Jim O'Bryan]

David

Now your post is just overboard and all over the place.

What makes you think that I do not know what I was doing? Do you really think i was hoping for the MONEY SHOT, when a life is at stake, or the reputation of the town I have worked so hard to promote?

What makes you think we are not talking with police, the mayor and others on the ground during these moments? Have you ever heard of us being in the way? We go out of our way to get out of the way.

While every other newspaper and TV station went to the family for comments, we stayed away. Respectful of the family sorrows and pain. We know that "He was a good kid" adds nothing but more pain to the family. So point you insensitive rap at the rest. The Joslin family is a neighbor a friend and a member of the community.

Now let's go to the"real" media. This has become laughable I have had to explain it so many times. I have been in the "paper" and on TV more than 50 times. Every time outs comes a reporter that is in a hurry to get somewhere else, they all bring with them the same baggage we all carry. Attitudes, preconceived notions, prejudice and a general lack of knowledge over the subject being covered.

Compare that with the civic journalist who writes about where he or she is passionate about, care about, take part in and put forward. I have found you get a better story, deeper story, and a friendly story. when you can add in that you might know the writer, it brings it home all the more.

You can strike out then defend your comments, but please do not tell me I was hoping for the money shot, and that the people that contribute to the paper are not "reporters."

FWIW

[Jim O'Bryan]

As worthy as the Observer is, it should NOT be immune to criticism. Otherwise its "meet the new boss, same as the old boss"

I agree 100%.

As the community paper we must be completely open to the needs and concerns of the city.

If we are doing something wrong then tell us, if you have a solution bring it to the table.

We are immuned to nothing, and dedicated to improvement.

Thanks for the kind words.


.

[Jim O'Bryan]

Compare that with the civic journalist who writes about where he or she is passionate about, care about, take part in and put forward. I have found you get a better story, deeper story, and a friendly story. when you can add in that you might know the writer, it brings it home all the more.



FWIW

As the devils advocate, I would point out that the qualities you describe above are exactly what a professionally trained journalist is supposed to AVOID. Im not sure when I open the NY Times that I want to read a story by a reporter is is "passionate" about the war, pro or con. I certainly wouldnt want that reporter "taking part in" the story.
As you can see its not a one-sided issue.

Dee


It is not a one sided issue. It is an issue we are very sensitive to. Many people do know understand that we met for almost a year before the website went up and a year and a half before the first paper.

We follow the same rules and laws of other papers, and have a ten page book of rules for covering Lakewood and it's businesses. We take this very seriously.

In the situation you have put forward, I would run the run with people knowing the background, then look for the op ed piece to run against it, in that edition or in others.

The war is an interesting topic. I myself think it is one of the great failures in American history. At the same time I support the troops and the thoughts they have brought back. Some pro some anti.

What people have to understand, is that "real" reporters find it just as hard to keep their thoughts out of the paper and their articles.

For now it is the best we can do, but look for some amazing changes in the next year. To quote Emril, The LO is about to "kick it up a notch or two."

We still have open meetings and encourage all to stop by for coffee, tea or a beer to work with us or correct us. There is also suggestion boxes throughout the site.

In the end we are doing what we can, without feedback the project will stop growing.

I appreciate David Scott coming in, I just wish he had gotten some facts straight. I am sure many say the same of me and the Observer as well.

Thanks again.

[Frank Murtaugh]

Mr. O'Bryan and Mr. Austin:

I think you and the LO did a fine job of reporting this matter and I agree with your comments posted within the last hour. To me, Mr. O'Bryan's photos of the murderer are informative and indeed worth a thousand words.

I find it incredible that a poster refers to the murderer as a "obviously tortured individual" and then criticizes the victim.

Mr. O"Bryan's photo #5 and this morning's Plain Dealer article make it clear Williams is simply a low life thug who took the life of a fine, hard working young man who many in Lakewood, including this poster, enjoyed knowing.

[Beajay Michaud]

Mr. O'Bryan & Ott,

Yes some of the photos are very graphic. There was a warning for the photos. I'm a very senative person. Seeing those photos made it very real for me. All I can say it thank you for posting the truth.

No life is not all fuzzy bunnies.

[dl meckes]

The Observer does not follow the traditional newspaper model and does not follow the traditional journalism model.

The newspaper does not employ reporters and does not hand out any assignments. Nobody is told what to write.

The Observer wants points of view from writers for the most part.

I'd much prefer someone who is involved with something to write from their expert vantage point. I like the notion that someone is sharing their passion, their interest, their knowledge about a subject.

That's more the kind of model the Observer is following.

[Dee Martinez]

The Observer does not follow the traditional newspaper model and does not follow the traditional journalism model.

The newspaper does not employ reporters and does not hand out any assignments. Nobody is told what to write.

The Observer wants points of view from writers for the most part.

I'd much prefer someone who is involved with something to write from their expert vantage point. I like the notion that someone is sharing their passion, their interest, their knowledge about a subject.

That's more the kind of model the Observer is following.

First off my apologies for my role in taking the other thread off topic.
But the above is a concern to me.
I would be wary of a CPA who said he didnt follow the "traditional accounting model" or a lawyer who said he didnt follow the "traditional legal model."

Cindy Sheehan may write moving pieces about Iraq. Michael Moore may do a great movie about health care. But when I think of "reporting" or "journalism" I think about disinterested (not UNinterested) people who can report facts DISpassionately and have some sort of professional training to craft a story that puts things into a broader perspective and points out inconsistencies in both sides' arguments.

If I own a dog I can write 20 pages about a dog park and how wonderful it is. If I dont own a dog and live next door to said park, I can write 20 pages about how awful it is. Who writes the dispassionate story?

Or are we to just look at two Fox News arguments by advocates and decide?

[Todd Shapiro]

Dee I understand and appreciate your concern for a newspaper saying it does not follow the “traditional news modelâ€Â￾ however, I would ask you what represents the traditional news model.

Much like the Lakewood Observer, television journalism employs person who are experts in their fields to use their knowledge to report on issues that fall within their base of knowledge. That is why we find former Cleveland Indians Centerfielder Rick Manning acting in a journalistic role of Indians baseball telecasts, ex-elected officials like Dennis Eckert working in on-air capacities on election night coverage and Dr. Tim Johnson reporting on health issues for ABC. Seeing how Manning’s paycheck is signed by the Indians, Eckert is a member of the Democratic Party and Dr. Johnson took the Hippocratic oath I am sure they are bring certain biases to the stories they cover and not just performing the dispassionate roles that we wish to think journalists play.

In fact every human being has biases, most “dispassionateâ€Â￾ journalists are liberal but we accept their coverage of Republicans and the Conservative movement as factual and dispassionate. Most professional journalists are also of the Christian and Jewish faiths; however, we allow them to present the “factsâ€Â￾ on Islam to readers and viewers everyday.
The main way that the Lakewood Observer model differs from the traditional model is because writers are not paid it is hard to assign them to a story or a beat. I have written sports stories for the Observer, because sports is my background and that is what I wanted to write. Seeing Jim or anyone is not paying me they really cannot tell me what to write I can write as I wish and they can print it or not. Also with citizen journalism you can report stories that are more meaningful to members of the community then under the traditional model. I am sitting here looking at the front page of today’s Plain Dealer, judging from the fact that fewer than half of American’s vote in the Presidential election the story titled, “Bush losing support from inside his campâ€Â￾ is not important to most residents of Cleveland (maybe it should be but that is another topic), the citizen journalist model is better able to feel the pulse of a community and report on what is important to the community than what should be important to the community.

I think there is a place for both types of journalism is today’s society and while much of what passes for news in the Lakewood Observer may not be up to the journalistic standards of the New York Times most of what’s written in the Observer and posted on the Observation Deck is more meaningful and connected to its readers and viewers than the traditional media can ever hope to be.

[Dee Martinez]

Good discussion.
Mr. Shapiro. I dont know much about baseball but if Mr. Marning is paid by the Indians then what he does on the game broadcasts cant be considered "journalism" He may be an "expert analyst" but he is not a reporter in the sense that the Plain Dealer writer, whom I assume DOESNT' get a check from the team, would be.

As for most journalists being "liberal" I guess that is hard to prove or disprove. I do know that there have been in recent years case after case of journalists being fired demoted or discredited for fudging the facts or letting their personal biases gete in the way. Dan Rather, Jayson Blair, Judith Miller, and I am sure there are others.

My point is that I dont particularly trust a "news" story about a city council meeting written by a supporter of the mayor or Ryan Demro. In that case I would far more prefer to read a story by someone who lives in Mentor, who can sort out the facts and doesnt have a "dog in the fight" This is similar to the "change of venue" situations in trials.
In any case I think the Observer does a good job in keeping its ear to the ground I just take every word here (and elshwere) with that proverbial grain of salt,