Unlike the traditional branches of the media, the Web offers a tremendous forum for real dialogue between readers and the journalists who gather, edit and distribute news and commentary.
We at globeandmail.com are strongly committed to the widest possible conversations with our readers through live discussions, "comment on this article", blogs and other features.
We've greatly expanded all of these over the past few months — not without a few bumps along the way.
While many of you have taken the time to tell us that you like these new formats for two-way dialogue, others have questioned the policies associated with them or made suggestions for alternative approaches.
We'd like to continue that dialogue right now with globeandmail.com editor Angus Frame and executive editor Jim Sheppard, who are on-line to take your questions.
Angus Frame has been with The Globe and Mail since 1996 in various capacities in the news and Report on Business sections. He moved to globeandmail.com in 2000 as Deputy Editor in charge of business coverage and became the site's editor on Sept.10, 2001.
He has an honours BA in Political Science from McMaster University and a Journalism degree from Ryerson University. He lives in Toronto's High Park neighbourhood with his wife, daughter and dog.
Jim Sheppard joined globeandmail.com four months ago after spending the past 10 years helping to launch, then develop washingtonpost.com and ABCNews.com Prior to that, he was a foreign correspondent for The Canadian Press, based in Moscow
and London.
Sheppard is also a Ryerson graduate who worked for The London Free Press, Saskatoon Star-Phoenix, and the late Ottawa Journal before spending 16 years with CP.
Editor's Note: Even in this discussion, globeandmail.com editors will read and allow or reject each question/comment. Comments/questions may be edited for length or clarity. HTML is not allowed. We will not publish questions/comments that include personal attacks on participants in these discussions, that make false or unsubstantiated allegations, that purport to quote people or reports where the purported quote or fact cannot be easily verified, or questions/comments that include vulgar language or libellous statements. Preference will be given to readers who submit questions/comments using their full name and home town, rather than a pseudonym.
However, since we get a fair number of questions about this policy — and its implementation — you can rest assured that one of the things we'll try to do is explain this in more detail.
Michael Snider, globeandmail.com: With us today are Angus Frame, editor of globeandmail.com and his number two, Jim Sheppard, executive editor. We have them corralled for an hour, so now's the time to hit them with whatever complaint, question or comment you might have about how the website handles comments and the introduction of live discussions, blogs and other features designed to encourage and facilitate two-way dialogue between reader (that's you) and big media monolith (that's us).
Before we jump into questions from readers, let me throw something out to both Angus and Jim: What on earth compelled you to think that letting readers speak out, and actually publish what they have to say, would be a good thing?
Angus Frame, Editor: I sense a wee bit of sarcasm in Mike's question so he may be disappointed that I deliver a somewhat straight-faced serious and even "worthy" answer. Globe readers are a diverse and interesting group. They know a lot. They have a lot to say. Their words and insights make the website a more interesting and dynamic place. So we opened the floodgates and asked 'em to talk ... talk to us ... talk to each other. I admit there are moments, as I wade through some of the more partisan debates, that I question the wisdom of the move but I still firmly believe it was the right thing to do. Interestingly, it was only after we opened to door to comments that people began telling me I was censoring them by not posting 100% of their insights to the site instantly. Sigh.
Jim Sheppard, Executive Editor: Thanks, Mike. It's always nice to be a sitting target. I've always believed — even as far back as 1995 when my friends asked me why I was "abandoning journalism" to go work on the Web — that one of the keys to success on-line for any major media brand is two-way communication with readers. In the early days, that was just a cut-and-paste e-mail exchanges. Now, of course, it's "community journalism," blogs, comments, discussions and more. I think both sides benefit from this kind of interactivity. Readers get to pose questions to journalists and experts to get the information and analysis that they seek, rather than have us dictate to them what they get. It's also instructive to see how many Globe journalists, such as Doug Saunders, have said after one of our live discussions that they use reader feedback to inform themselves and to guide their reporting.
