We tweet you right
We may be a little late to the party, but we've arrived. (Thanks to shoves by Ivan Lajara, our he-knows-a-lot-more-about-digital-technology-than-most-of-us Life editor, and by the enlightened new management at our parent company, Journal Register Company, which is quickly trying to make up for lost time and emphasizing the new media (without ignoring the core print product).
In the weeks ahead, you'll see additional content and assorted bells and whistles (to use the low-tech term) on our Website.
We'll keep you posted as we progress.
Meantime, I can't help but telling you about how newspapers sometimes can't win, whether it's in print or on-line.
The comments section under our stories has been a popular feature since the day it was installed. The free flow back and forth is not always pretty, but it's certainly passionate and generates lots of interest.
The newspaper serves as a referee of sorts. Pretty much everything that's submitted is approved ... with several key exceptions: no libel, no improper language, no phony names (or no names at all) by those who register, and, hopefully, no gratuitous personal attacks.
The latter is toughest to determine, because the qualification line may be different depending on your sensibilities.
Which brings us to how a newspaper can't win.
Glancing at the comments today, I noticed one from a writer who claimed we'd censored his remarks. (They didn't get an OK, it turns out, because they were virtually incomprehensible.) A few posts later, we were chastised for allowing someone's remarks to be posted. How dare we?, was the gist of the complaint.
The newspaper OKs a post and it's blasted. It does not OK a post and it's blasted.
Welcome to our world.