Another critique

As promised, I'm back with a quick critique on our how we're doing at promoting/linking items in print for online.

We had a pair of videos to promote on 1A today and I think what the page designer did worked fine. I may work up a more abbreviated sig we can use when we need a second reference to video on a page (maybe just adding "video online" would work), but given the options at hand, I thought was fine.

Had we desired (or had the space) we could have referred to our special section on the economy in the Christmas tree story. We could have referred to it on 6A in the Marshfield "exchange" story, as well. Unfortunately, neither of these stories were included in the "Economy in Trouble" special section, either. We could even refer to it in an economy story on a wire page like 7A. or our Nation/World page from GNS.

We didn't have the gallery up for the Judd performance until late this morning, so it was good that we didn't promo the gallery in print.

The Marathon Cup story could have included a sig referring to the earlier gallery or Varsity.

On a side note, I'd like to applaud whomever created the promos for today's WDH 1A. It included a well-placed cutout, varying (but not clashing) headlines (in color, font and size) and looked nice.

You all work hard to help connect all the different components online and in print and I appreciate it. It's tough to keep things that are a couple of weeks old (the economy special section) top of mind. If you have ideas on how to keep these weeks old items fresh in your workflow, we can keep them fresh for our readers.

Thanks,

Brian O.