This is a topic I might elaborate further on in the coming weeks.
I was thinking the other day about how a newsroom should operate its daily workflow, particularly a college newsroom (since, for the time being, I’m editor of one), and how many use the Web for it. When I first began working at CM Life, we operated on NewsEdit Pro and Quark Xpress. Now it’s InCopy and InDesign for their flexibility and the ability to edit copy while designers are at work. My two internships — The Saginaw News and Grand Rapids Press — also introduced me to workflows based around print, with Saginaw using NewsEdit Pro and Grand Rapids also using a form of InCopy/InDesign.
The productivity is no doubt efficient. The problem is the workflow is based around the print operation in a newsroom that’s supposed to think Web-first.
So when is the right time to switch to a Web content management system for your base newsroom workflow?
This is worth repeating, just so you know where I’m coming from: Central Michigan Life is the student paper of a university in a town of 23,000 people (Mount Pleasant). From comparing print and online readership, it is clear that our print audience is still our primary audience. With that in mind, we have to milk our print product while it still has value in the community, especially since most of our advertising revenue comes from print. You can’t just “warp to the end” (i.e. go online-only), even if you know that’s where the future is heading.
So in a newsroom that still values the print product, is it efficient to move to the Web with your workflow? I would certainly consider it. Here’s the comparison between CM Life’s current workflow and a proposed Web workflow (NOTE: CM Life production days are Sunday, Tuesday and Thursday to put out a paper the following day):
CURRENT WORKFLOW:
- Step 1: Reporter works on the story, finishes it and saves it in a document to e-mail to their editor by 11 a.m. on production day. (If they work on it in the newsroom, they save it in InCopy in the server.)
- Step 2: Editor opens the story on production day, edits via InCopy, saves it when they’re done and moves it into the next folder in the process.
- Step 3: Previous process continues with the Managing Editor and the Editor in Chief. Story is then saved into the “To be Placed” folder for the designers, and copied into a “Web Stories” folder.
- Step 4A: The designer places the InCopy document into InDesign. Proofreader reads the printed page, then makes necessary changes on a computer while the designer continues working with other pages.
- Step 4B: While 4A proceeds, news editors take the story in “Web Stories” and copies & pastes it into a new WordPress post, scheduling it for posting depending on timeliness (timely stories go right away).
WEB WORKFLOW:
- Step 1: Reporter works on the story in the Web CMS, no matter when or where they’re at. They write a headline, excerpt, tags and set a category. With their given privileges, they save the draft and notify their editor when it’s ready.
- Step 2: Editor gives the story the first read within 1-2 hours after the story’s done (even on non-production days). They save it, manage any other components and (if the story is time-relevant), they publish it to the Web.
- Step 3: The story goes through the normal editing process on the production day, up through the EIC, and the story is saved to the Web after each edit.
- Step 4: After copy editors/designers receive the story budget for the newspaper on production days, they pull the stories from the Web when they’re ready, save them in InCopy and place them on the pages.
(Notice how one step is removed in the latter flow. Since the stories are already formatted and ready on the Web, the news editors would not have to create new posts at night, and the Web would not be an afterthought during a normal production day)
The pros to moving to a Web CMS are apparent. It is simply more efficient for your 24/7 online operation to base your work around a Web CMS. Reporters, with their own usernames and set privileges, can access the CMS, work with their story and even practice writing headlines, tagging, etc. It also makes it much quicker for an editor to get the story online when it’s timely and valuable — all they have to do is press a button now, rather than Add New Post by scratch, when they’re done editing.
Fact is, a story doesn’t need to go through four edits before it’s posted. This way, you can get a story up quickly, then make necessary edits to the story as you go.
The cons? Internet access is not always available for reporters working outside the newsroom, although that’s quickly changing. Furthermore, while WordPress (our Web CMS) offers plenty of features and flexibility for us to base a workflow around, it is limited in terms of organizing editorial content and interacting with other newsroom personnel efficiently. Those are some of the issues that CoPress’ EditFlow project seeks to rectify, however.
The great thing is that moving to a Web workflow does not take much away from your print product if you still work with one, but can work wonders in boosting your online performance. You’re updating the Web with stories when they’re timely while still going through your core editing process. Thinking long-term, you also can adapt better to changing demands and a changing industry, particularly as print becomes less and less valuable in the community.
I am interested to hear what others have to say on this. What are other student newsrooms using for organizing their content and workflow? If you’ve already moved to the Web, what are your observations, challenges and — most importantly — results?
Posted by Brian Manzullo at April 26, 2010
Journalism