In his New York Times column, Daniel Okrent made an interesting suggestion, on how to allow better communication between newspapers staff and readers: "In an age when the press is so widely regarded as a predatory and uncontrolled beast, the failure to allow readers a view inside the cage can only aggravate their worst suspicions." The ombudsman's role could be completed with a column on the online edition of the New York times: "Times reporters and editors often respond to readers who make individual inquiries, frequently acknowledging that, yes, an article missed a nuance, or used phrasing that left an erroneous impression, or otherwise got something wrong - not a correctable fact, perhaps, but an implication or interpretation. The recipient of such a note ends up both grateful and edified, and that is swell for him or her, but doesn't provide any enlightenment for the several hundred thousands of others who may have read the initial story and been misled by it. Why not provide an arena on The Times's Web site where reporters could voluntarily provide this sort of corrective amplification? Maybe. But even without erecting this online confessional, The Times's editors could render an enormous service (and save themselves a world of grief) by finding ways to speak directly to the paper's entire readership."