My Bad: Pointing out Gannett's Cookie Cutter online format


A version of this was posted earlier today in my D&C weblog. Within an hour it was deleted. I guess there are certain things you can't do on your D&C blog. One of them is you can't criticize Gannett.

I followed a link to the Reno Gazette-Journal sent to me involving a story about a Nevada lawyer who has filed suit in an attempt to prevent Hillary Clinton from being on the ballot because the Constitution uses the pronoun "he" to refer to the president.

What to my wondering eyes should appear: a page that looks exactly like the D&C online.

So I thought, hmmm...how many other Gannett sites use this same cookie cutter format?

Quite a few. To see for yourself, go here.

Don't get me wrong. There are many aspects of the new format I like. I do think it needs a bit of tweaking.

But it dawned on me: none of that tweaking is going to happen, because the format has been pushed from on high in Gannett headquarters.

Complaining to the locals in charge probably won't do a whit of good. And soon, every Gannett online paper is going to look exactly like this one.

*****
A version of this was posted earlier today in my D&C weblog. Within an hour it was deleted. I guess there are certain things you can't do on your D&C blog. One of them is you can't criticize Gannett.

Of course Gannett can do anything it wants with reader contributions. The site belongs to them and they have the right to control its content. You won't find me crying "censorship" or "free speech violation" over this.

Still, this highlights the real function of reader-interactive online news formats. Their number one function is not to provide readers with access to more information, but rather to promote the business interests of the corporations that own them.

I will continue to make the best use I can of what's available. But I have no illusions that these online formats have community needs and interests as their purpose for being.

Posted: Fri - April 11, 2008 at 02:48 PM          

©