This site has received quite a bit of attention for the “R.I.P.” column, which has been a fixture on our sidebar since day one. However, we think the headline for that column may have run its course and we’d like your opinion.
The big problem is that not every title in that column has ceased to exist. The Capital Times, for example, is still plugging away online and even delivers a print publication twice a week. The Ann Arbor News is about to go the same route and the Seattle Post-Intelligencer has abandoned print but is bullishly trying to reinvent itself on the Web.
If we have the Capital Times there, we really should add the Christian Science Monitor, which is about to go weekly in print but stay 24/7 online. Several papers have recently cut back to four or five days a week and more are likely to follow. They aren’t R.I.P. but neither are they really daily newspapers any more. Should they be on the list?
So, your opinions please. Should we:
1. Leave R.I.P. as it is on the assumption that nothing is perfect in this world?
2. Leave the title as R.I.P. but limit the list to papers that are truly defunct? Gone? Pffft?
3. Leave the title R.I.P., list papers that can no longer be considered dailies but may exist in other forms and add a silly disclaimer like this one?
4. Change R.I.P. to “Out of Print” and list papers that can no longer be considered dailies but that may live in other forms?
5. Something else we haven’t thought of?
Sorry for the lengthy explanation, but this kind of thing really does cause us to lose sleep.
This entry was posted on Thursday, March 26th, 2009 at 5:37 am and is filed under NewMedia, Newspapers. You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed. Both comments and pings are currently closed.