What deserves Page 1 attention?

We began today’s meeting with a discussion about how difficult it can be to monitor the content of online ads that are adjacent to stories. One journalism professor took exception to Mike McGavick’s “mom’s lesson” video ad being placed next to an AP story about a bizarre murder and fatal traffic accident in Boise. You’re welcome to express your opinion in the comments section.

A striking image

Dan Pelle’s photo of the refueling of the Thunderbirds was spectacular and deserved Page 1 treatment. (In fact Pelle plans to do an audio slideshow on the web to show other photos from that trip and to explain how this one came about.) There was nothing wrong with the story , but it probably wasn’t strong enough, on its own, to deserve Page 1 centerpiece display. But that’s how things sometimes work at the newspaper. A quality photo will determine story play.

Remember Vincent Bertollini?

Another question was whether the story of Vincent Bertollini’s arrest was worth Page 1, especially considering the story about the ground-breaking Supreme Court ruling that didn’t make Page 1.

Bertollini at one time was a key figure among racists in North Idaho. He disappeared five years ago in the wake of a drunken driving charge. Since then, Richard Butler has died and the Aryan Nations has moved. Have we finally reached a point where stories about these guys no longer belong on Page 1? What do you think?

Should there be such a thing as “breaking news” in print?

A judge made an important ruling yesterday morning in the Catholic diocese case. We posted that story to the web yesterday as soon as it was written and edited.

Reporter John Stucke has very good knowledge of this case, and his clear writing style helps everyone understand what’s going on in a complicated case.

So here’s the question: Should today’s story for print be different than yesterday’s web version? Today’s newspaper story had this lead paragraph:

Catholic parishes in Eastern Washington – not the Spokane Catholic Diocese – own their churches and schools, a federal judge ruled Thursday morning.

One argument is that it’s important news and we’re obligated to publish it as a “first-day” breaking news story. Another argument is that we should use Stucke’s expertise to write a story for print that’s slightly different than the one on the web, a story that would focus more on explaining for readers “what this means,” and, perhaps, “what comes next.” What do you think?

Tough work, but somebody’s got to do it

We’re all going to pitch in and buy a pack of Rolaids for reporter Tom Bowers, who took one for the “7” team by tasting Buffalo wings all over town. See his cover story in today’s whopping, 40-page “7” section.