Transcript of #editorchat 6/10
[21:24:39] anndouglas: RT @dijeratic When online news stories disappear, is this Orwellian? Should they keep link for verification (ethically)? #editorchat
[21:24:47] SpecialDee: Q1 Newspapers support each other by linking to each other, SEO, Link Economy #editorchat
[21:25:03] deegospel: @milehighfool q2: The process should start with a mindset that reporting first may not mean being the fastest #editorchat
[21:25:07] TimOBrienNYT: Readers don’t get retrained. Writers do. RT @LydiaBreakfast: a story’s a story even if it’s prefaced by “this is rumor” #editorchat
[21:25:10] milehighfool: @TimOBrienNYT A great question for TechCrunch and Gawker. Your take on Q2? #editorchat
[21:25:11] thisdog: Be first and right. That’s my motto. Update. Don’t throw out one part of the race for the other. Run barefoot but at what cost? #editorchat
[21:25:20] jennipps: Q2 @cutestkidever That’s actually quite true. I think as long as it provides verifiable/provable results, it works. #editorchat
[21:25:52] GrammarGirl: #editorchat happening now. (Do at search for #editorchat to follow along.)
[21:26:02] karlgoldfield: RT @deegospel: What’s the right process for real-time reporting? Is there one? YES!!! CALL ME AND I WILL SHARE. BAM AND ONDMD #editorchat
[21:26:16] KakieF: @learncreativity thanks for the tip!! #editorchat
[21:26:22] LydiaBreakfast: @TimOBrienNYT How so, do you mean by accepting that it’s OK to report rumor? If so, doesn’t putting that out retrain readers? #editorchat
[21:26:34] cutestkidever: Q2 Besides, who’s to say you’re doing it wrong unless you get called out by the NYTimes? 
#editorchat
[21:27:01] KakieF: I asked a question earlier let me do so again. When you begin writing, do you always know what the intended outcome is? #editorchat
[21:27:03] cutestkidever: Q2 Even then, getting called out gets more eyeballs on your publication and your story… still a winning situation. #editorchat
[21:27:11] KatPowers: RT @cutestkidever Q2 Besides, who’s to say you’re doing it wrong unless you get called out by the NYTimes? #editorchat
[21:27:16] SpecialDee: Q1 the point is that each of the local newspapers becomes curators of content that is relevant to their audiences #editorchat
[21:27:35] cutestkidever: @KakieF Not always. #editorchat
[21:27:45] OurBigEarth: RT @anndouglas: I think we owe it to our readers to cite our sources and to educate them about source credibility issues. #editorchat
[21:27:47] TimOBrienNYT: Actually, we dove into this in SunBiz last weekend: http://bit.ly/3RVi84 RT @milehighfool: great question for TechCrunch. #editorchat
[21:28:01] GLHancock: Q2: depends on who is paying, doesn’t it? #editorchat
[21:28:32] KatPowers: How so? RT @GLHancock Q2: depends on who is paying, doesn’t it? #editorchat
[21:28:41] SuburbNews: In the end, credibility means something – to “old” and “new” media sites alike. If you’re consistently wrong, people will ignore #
[21:29:02] kbeninato: @rondoylewrites Newsweek’s online Joe Scarborough story was changed after his producers complained, but a screenshot turned up. #editorchat
[21:29:11] milehighfool: @TimOBrienNYT That story, and the TechCrunch response, kicked off this topic. An important conversation, we think. #editorchat
[21:29:20] TimOBrienNYT: YES!! RT @OurBigEarth: RT @anndouglas: we owe it to readers to cite our sources and educate them about credibility issues. #editorchat
[21:29:37] milehighfool: @SuburbNews Yes. Very well said. #editorchat
