Results matching “mixed reactions 1”

The American press has been subjected to much criticism for its reporting on the events in a West Virginia coal mine that culminated in the deaths of 12 miners.

Many newspapers have been criticised for releasing editions on Wednesday 4, January containing the false information that 12 miners, involved in an accident resulting from an explosion, had been miraculously found alive.

An eleventh hour agreement concerning control over the technology powering the internet was reached in Tunis last night. The text of the agreement must be approved at the UN-sponsored World Summit on the Information Society which begins today.

The crux is that the United States will continue its control over the internet through the Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers (ICANN). ICANN retains its power to allocate web adresses and regulate domain names.

One week ago, two new newspapers in compact format launched in the United Arab Emirates (see previous posting). The two papers were finally called Emirates Today for the English edition and Al Emarat Al Youm for the Arab edition. It seems that the new papers prompted mixed reactions. As Campaign Middle East reports, Gavin Dickinson, commercial director at the Arab Media Group which publishes the two newspapers, said that the launch was an "unqualified success, but admitted there had been problems with the paper’s reproduction in the first issue."

In an attempt to increase its advertising revenue, The Wall Street Journal printed its first weekend edition in over 50 years on Saturday, September 17, reports the New York Times . It was met with a mixed reactions by readers: some who appreciated the lighter news and features than those which are printed during the week; others who complained that the glory of reading the Journal is that one does not have to read it on the weekends because of its business oriented content. The weekend edition has already brought about a marked difference in the Journal's advertising strategy; ads will now be found on the front pages of the paper's sections which were formerly reserved for content. "Weekend edition inspired us to think of new ways to offer creative units to our advertisers," said Judy Barry, senior vice president for sales and marketing for WSJ. "The minute the sales force heard about it, they asked if we could expand it to the daily paper." The Journal said that it could take up to three years to determine whether or not the weekend edition, which is included in the price of a WSJ membership and delivered to subscribers' weekend addresses, is successful or not. However, if subscribers don't appreciate the new approach of placing ads where there once were none, the Wall Street Journal may have its results sooner than expected.

Source: New York Times

The New York Times, who's May announcement of an upcoming subscription service faded over the summer, is poised to start charging for some content as of September 19. This week, the Times began posting explanations on its own website detailing the package, dubbed TimesSelect, and offering twenty percent off the $50 price tag to those who sign-up before the launch date. Subscribers will have access to the Times respected op-ed columnists, 12 feature writers from the Business, NewYork/Region and Sports sections as well as two additional columnists from The International Herald Tribune and access to 100 archived articles per month. The package also includes early access to articles in the Sunday Times, personalized email alerts and a tool that allows readers to organize articles from all over the Web for future consultation.

Reactions to the service have been mixed. Some feel that online subscription experiments are necessary for papers looking to earn more revenue from the Web. Others, especially proponents of free online content and bloggers who regularly comment on the Times' op-eds, have criticized the move and feel that the paper's online traffic will decrease considerably. Only time will tell, but the failure or success of TimesSelect could determine the failure or success of online newspaper subscriptions.

Source: New York Times

The New York Times, who's May announcement of an upcoming subscription service faded over the summer, is poised to start charging for some content as of September 19. This week, the Times began posting explanations on its own website detailing the package, dubbed TimesSelect, and offering twenty percent off the $50 price tag to those who sign-up before the launch date. Subscribers will have access to the Times respected op-ed columnists, 12 feature writers from the Business, NewYork/Region and Sports sections as well as two additional columnists from The International Herald Tribune and access to 100 archived articles per month. The package also includes early access to articles in the Sunday Times, personalized email alerts and a tool that allows readers to organize articles from all over the Web for future consultation.

Reactions to the service have been mixed. Some feel that online subscription experiments are necessary for papers looking to earn more revenue from the Web. Others, especially proponents of free online content and bloggers who regularly comment on the Times' op-eds, have criticized the move and feel that the paper's online traffic will decrease considerably. Only time will tell, but the failure or success of TimesSelect could determine the failure or success of online newspaper subscriptions.

Source: New York Times

The New York Times, who's May announcement of an upcoming subscription service faded over the summer, is poised to start charging for some content as of September 19. This week, the Times began posting explanations on its own website detailing the package, dubbed TimesSelect, and offering twenty percent off the $50 price tag to those who sign-up before the launch date. Subscribers will have access to the Times respected op-ed columnists, 12 feature writers from the Business, NewYork/Region and Sports sections as well as two additional columnists from The International Herald Tribune and access to 100 archived articles per month. The package also includes early access to articles in the Sunday Times, personalized email alerts and a tool that allows readers to organize articles from all over the Web for future consultation.

Reactions to the service have been mixed. Some feel that online subscription experiments are necessary for papers looking to earn more revenue from the Web. Others, especially proponents of free online content and bloggers who regularly comment on the Times' op-eds, have criticized the move and feel that the paper's online traffic will decrease considerably. Only time will tell, but the failure or success of TimesSelect could determine the failure or success of online newspaper subscriptions.

Source: New York Times

In what may be a blow for investigative journalism in the United States (see former posting), New York Times reporter Judith Miller was held in contempt and condemned to 18 months in jail yesterday for refusing to divulge her anonymous sources. It was determined that Ms. Miller knows of one or more high officials in the Bush administration that allegedly disclosed the name of a covert CIA operative and that she must reveal those sources on the grounds of a possible national security breach. The sentence was handed down even though it is not certain if any law has been broken by any of the involved parties and even though Miller never wrote an article on the subject. The first journalist to break the story, Robert Novak, has escaped all legal repercussions and until recently had refused to announce his anonymous sources or even comment on the situation. Matthew Cooper, a Time magazine reporter and the second journalist to print the CIA operative's name, recently saw his notes handed over to the courts by his own company against his will, but escaped a sentence after a last minute deal with his source that permitted him to talk. Reactions to Miller's incarceration, opinions on the use of anonymous sources and ideas about a national shield law for the protection of journalists vary:

The op-ed pages of the Los Angeles Times are poised to go "wiki," using the technology of Wikipedia to integrate its readers into the opinion process. The section's editor, Michael Kinsley has already made a few changes to his staff and the way in which it functions, even allowing its writers a once a year opportunity to publish a column contradicting the papers editorial stance. The introduction of "wikitorials" is being met with mixed reactions from the daily's former Washington bureau chief Jack Nelson who exclaimed "it's absolutely crazy to have outsiders writing editorials," to Jan Schaffer, executive director of J-Lab at the University of Maryland who is refreshed by the idea that a newspaper is "creating new entry points for readers to weigh in with their collective wisdom and enrich the journalistic commentary." Still others, including Kinsley himself see it simply as an experiment that "may be one of those things that within six months will be standard." "It's the ultimate in reader participation," said Kinsley. With waning circulations and seemingly apathetic youth, Mr. Kinsley and the Times may be starting an experiment that could give newspapers the boost of innovation they need to remain competitive with new media.

Source: The New York Times

The op-ed pages of the Los Angeles Times are poised to go "wiki," using the technology of Wikipedia to integrate its readers into the opinion process. The section's editor, Michael Kinsley has already made a few changes to his staff and the way in which it functions, even allowing its writers a once a year opportunity to publish a column contradicting the papers editorial stance. The introduction of "wikitorials" is being met with mixed reactions from the daily's former Washington bureau chief Jack Nelson who exclaimed "it's absolutely crazy to have outsiders writing editorials," to Jan Schaffer, executive director of J-Lab at the University of Maryland who is refreshed by the idea that a newspaper is "creating new entry points for readers to weigh in with their collective wisdom and enrich the journalistic commentary." Still others, including Kinsley himself see it simply as an experiment that "may be one of those things that within six months will be standard." "It's the ultimate in reader participation," said Kinsley. With waning circulations and seemingly apathetic youth, Mr. Kinsley and the Times may be starting an experiment that could give newspapers the boost of innovation they need to remain competitive with new media.

Source: The New York Times