
So “Men of a Certain Age” got canned, which is sad, but not for the reason most people think. Is it Was it a viable contender for “best show you’re not watching on TV,” (and since “Friday Night Lights” has retired, that title is up for grabs)? Indeed.
Did it deserve another shot because of poor marketing and bungled scheduling. Yes.
Was it a well acted, written and directed drama on a cable network still looking to create an identity for itself with scripted shows? Sure.
Was it a chance to see a new side of Ray Ramano and a reminder of all the things we love about Andre Braugher, and – yes, yes! – Scott Bakula? Absolutely.
But none of this has anything to do with why I think it was awful to see “Men of a Certain Age” go away. I’ll miss it because it was one of the few shows on TV today to offer up compelling and, more importantly, relatable characters. To put it plainly: Ray Ramano and Mike Royce made a great show about what its like to be a guy, and TV could use more of that.


Sound familiar?
How exactly do reader comments fit into journalism
While there are plenty of lessons from the Press Herald Apology (or “Apologygate if you’re looking for a hashtag), one that stuck out to me is what exactly is the role of reader comments in the editorial process?
One of my complaints about the whole affair is that by issuing an apology, particularly to all those voicing their anger over Facebook, Twitter, email and online comments, the Press Herald had “cede(ed) editorial control to the crowd.”
But how should newspapers use reader comments when it comes to making decisions on coverage, story placement or even the reporting process?
(For the moment let’s set aside the other debates on comments, meaning we won’t talk about whether they’re worthwhile or how to improve them. Though former Press Herald colleague Carl Natale has a good idea on how to try and make them civil`.)
The easiest answer is tips and story ideas, as evidenced by this blog post. In the previous post on L’Affair de Press Herald, a commenter said something that stuck in my head:
“And I disagree with you, in that in our web 2.0 world with all of its new interactions between big institutions and their constituents, in a world of declining circulation, and in a world of crowdsourcing, that all newspapers are missing the boat here by retaining 100% control over what stories are reported.”
(Thanks to the commenter who wrote that…but next time think about leaving your name for credit! Also, can we not use the phrase Web 2.0? Please?)
Read the rest of this page »
Posted by Justin Ellis | September 22, 2010 | Categories: Journalism | Tags: apology, feedback, journalism, online comments, Portland Press Herald, transparency | 2 Comments »