Archives for posts with tag: print desk

During the arguably historic snowstorm earlier this month, many of the students and faculty who normally work on the Missourian’s interactive copy desk were unable to leave their homes. For those of us working primarily on the website, that’s not a huge problem. Our Web content management system lives online. Any of us can log into it from anywhere, as long we have Internet access. And because we’re Web-first, we edit almost all our content using this system, rather than our print CMS, which is only a part of the process after the fact for our small team of print designers and editors.

So working from home is no problem. But communicating with half a dozen people in half a dozen places? That’s harder. How do we efficiently let everyone know what needs doing and who should do it?

The impromptu solution we came up with was to launch a group chat within Gmail. Most of our students use Gmail for their personal e-mail, and even those who don’t will open Gmail accounts in order to get access to Google Docs and Google Analytics, two services we make extensive use of at the Missourian. While Skype or AIM might have been more reliable and elegant, Gmail Chat was the service we could get students and faculty most easily.

The chat function lives in the left-hand sidebar of Gmail:

The hardest part is inviting each new person to chat with you, and that’s not really hard. You simply type each invitee’s Gmail address in the invitation window. Once one person has accepted, you can invite that person to chat. Then, you invite each new person from the existing chat window, creating a group chat, where everyone can see everything that is being said.

It worked really well. We looped in the interactive copy desk, our print team and the management hub. I was the on-duty news editor working from home the first night of the storm, and I found myself completely looped in to what was going on. The next day, I was able to get to work, but many of us still couldn’t, so we fired up the chat again. And we did it again on the third day, even though most of us had made it in to the newsroom by that time. A surprising aspect of the chat was this: It helped those of us in the office communicate better with each other. It’s easy to make a quick announcement to everyone (“Hey, don’t forget to use the #comosnow hashtag!”) without having to command their immediate attention or contribute to the avalanche of e-mail.

So a question for us has become: Should the group chat become a permanent feature of work on the interactive copy desk and the management hub? I’m thinking about it. Missourian folk, what do you think?

(also posted on the Reynolds Journalism Institute blog)

by Jake Sherlock

Print Editor (and Opinion Editor, and assistant professor)

The idea behind The Transition was to isolate our print operations into one small team that would handle the five-day-a-week community newspaper, which is managed by professionals and produced by students.

That team would consist of one faculty editor, the students in the Advanced News Design class, a few paid students working as designers and editors, and a pair of media assistants handling the less glamorous side of print production like putting ads on pages and filling in lottery numbers.

No managing editor. No photo editor. No graphics editor. No reporters. They were all left to focus on our digital offerings.

Oh, and about that isolation thing? We’re tucked back into the far corner of the newsroom. It’s not a basement boiler room, but we’re clearly not the focus of the newsroom. That honor goes to the interactive copy desk now, and its close companion, The Hub, where all of the content-producing editors gather to coordinate our digital offerings.

We print folk do our own thing.

They have ColumbiaMissourian.com, and we have the Columbia Missourian. For a long time, the two publications mirrored each other. That ended under The Transition. Among the changes:

  • We no longer discuss the print product at our afternoon budget meeting. The focus is all about what’s already online, what’s still to come and how it’s going to be handled digitally. Print team members sit in on these meetings, take notes, and then decide which content is best for print.
  • We no longer wait for content to come to us. We work the newsroom to get what we want. (This is where The Hub comes in handy.) We have a limited news hole and a ton of online offerings.
  • We only “order” print content from departments as part of our presentation. Example: Previously, our graphics staff would conceive graphics for print and shovel them online. Now, all graphics are made for an online presentation; print graphics are only made if the print team asks for them.
  • We follow our own publication schedule. If the piece of journalism has a yesterday, today or tomorrow attached to it, it runs right away. But we will hold a centerpiece package to run when we can give it the best presentation possible. The same goes for a long narrative or a photo essay. Or we might hold something to produce print-only companion content.
  • We produce content. My favorite example came with our Thanksgiving food page, in which the designers each contributed a Thanksgiving recipe to a doubletruck page. Everyone prepared their own dish, then brought them to the photo studio for a shoot. It was a fun team-building exercise (anything with food and journalists usually is), and a great way to share recipes with our readers that they too could make for the holidays.

Working the room certainly changed some dynamics. With all of the “official” meetings focused on digital, other editors would come to our corner of the newsroom to make recommendations or lobby for front-page play.

The managing editor would stop by at 6 p.m. for a quick check-in and to get a rundown of what was happening on the front page.

But overall, their focus was still where we wanted it to be: How to deliver news digitally.

No longer is the entire newsroom dictated by print deadlines.

Just us.

Overall, I’m proud of the work our students did. Even with fewer resources and fewer copy editors, we maintained our quality while giving the Missourian a much different identity than its online sister publications. The print team learned to be resourceful, nimble and proactive journalists, which are essential skills for any platform.

But most importantly, we didn’t just think about the reader – we thought about today’s PRINT reader.

Find out more about the work the Missourian’s print team is doing at blog.jakesherlock.com

(This is also posted on the Reynolds Journalism Institute blog)

The Missourian is wrapping up a semester-long experiment designed to improve the focus of our website production and change the definition of a newspaper copy editor.

The assessment: It works. The changes could be implemented in other newsrooms – but only if senior and assigning editors let go of the print control.

Like many newspapers, we’ve called ourselves “Web first” for a long time, but we knew we weren’t really when it came to editing. The Missourian’s production rolled along the factory assembling line from mid-afternoon to midnight. Meanwhile, the website came together sort of auto-magically, requiring minimal effort on the part of copy editors to select a fresh set of stories to highlight on the home page periodically.

We decided we needed a radical change.

In August, we segregated all print production processes from the day-to-day operations of the newsroom.

Most of our copy editors, most of the time, would have no involvement with the print product.

Instead, they’d become “interactive copy editors.” They would focus on getting stories to our website quickly and accurately, on finding ways to increase reader engagement with our work online, and on making sure the website is always putting its best possible foot forward. The work of a copy editor would be just beginning when an article published.

A small team of editors and designers, working separately, would manage all the details of the print edition, from story selection to final proofing, piggybacking as much as possible on the work of the interactive copy desk. They – not the managing editor, metro editor or senior news editor – would effectively “own” the print edition.

It has gone surprisingly well. We succeeded in resetting the rhythm of the whole newsroom.

We’re no longer focused on the paper tomorrow — the print team worries about that for all of us.

Instead we’re occupying news editors and copy editors with the work of producing the website 18 hours a day every weekday.

We actually made the mistake of continuing to staff the desk lightly on Friday afternoons and not at all on Friday evenings — as we have since the Missourian ended its Saturday print edition — but soon realized that Fridays had become just like any other weekday — busier than most, actually. We had to adjust.

Interactive copy editors are in charge of our social networks. They regularly use Twitter and Facebook. But we can be more creative and proactive in soliciting reader input for potential stories, rather than just the ones we’ve already posted.

Interactive copy editors also monitor the comment boards at the end of every article. They take down comments that violate our policies, and they jump in when the conversation demands a Missourian response. We think copy editors could do more in mediating conflicts among commenters and soliciting comments on stories that ought to be sparking them but aren’t.

We need to be better, too, at figuring out how to create energy and engagement on the website when the news by itself just isn’t doing it. All these are on our list for tackling in earnest in the spring.

The biggest drawback to the experiment has been the print experience of headline writing for our student copy editors. While they still do an evening print shift every three or four weeks, it’s not enough experience, especially when it comes to headline writing. Writing headlines for print — in a space strictly prescribed — is a skill that only comes with intense practice. It makes them better at writing headlines for the website. We’ll retool for spring to rotate more copy editors into print shifts and, on those shifts, to increase their focus on perfecting their headlines.

However, the benefits of our experiment, which we dubbed The Transition, have far outweighed the drawbacks.

Our website has improved tremendously and, with our interactively focused copy desk, we see room for much more. Meanwhile, our designated print team has done a great job maintaining the print edition. Their exclusive focus on print has even improved the product in some ways. (See print editor Jake Sherlock’s separate report on that aspect of The Transition.) We’ll try to perfect the experiment in the spring. Watch our Transition blog (transition.columbiamissourian.com) for regular updates about what we’re doing on the interactive copy desk and in other aspects of the Missourian newsroom.

We’re barely on the downside of October. I asked for early updates, though, because the Missourian Publishing Association board of directors convenes 10/22, and the members will want an up-to-date report.

And so, without further ado, projects and their leaders’ reports:

COMOYOUKNOW (CMYK) — Creating a local, Wikipedia-like encyclopedia to provide systemic context for episodic news. – Laura Johnston

October update: Chris Carmody continues to take the lead on tracking edited entries and providing a consistent voice for the edits. Erin McNeil, a graduate student in 4406, is helping us edit the entries we’ve collected from various classes and past semesters. We’re moving at a slower pace than I’d hoped for, but we continue to make progress daily.

As we edit, we’re noticing gaps in  coverage. For example, we have no entry on prominent Columbians, such as Darwin Hindman. Another example: We have an entry on Pepper & Friends, but no entry on Paul Pepper, the personality behind the show. Most of the entries are related to places or organizations.

The Participatory Journalism class taught by Clyde Bentley is helping us to compile new entries, and finding local experts to contribute. Along with entries from students in a 2100 class taught by Mike Jenner and those from my 4400 students, we should have an additional 50 or 60 entries by the end of this semester.

The platform for publication continues to be of concern. At this time, it seems that a Google site will be our best option.

November plans: The launch date has been moved from Oct. 30, although all entries will be edited by that date.
The additional time will allow us to create the 200 web pages needed for the Google site. Once the site is active, the IT team should be able to make a quick redirect so that readers can find it.

Launch date: Nov. 15

*******************

INTERACTIVE COPY EDITING – Creating a new job description for copy editors while restructuring the copy editing course. – Nick Jungman

October update: We’re in cruise mode now. Laura continues to invent ways to keep the day-side editors busy in service of the site. Maggie has added the long list of interactive duties to the the copy desk log sheets, which the copy editing students use to track the work they do. The copy editing class transitioned back into some more traditional editing. We’ve discussed improvements to the way we cover breaking, evolving news events and the copy desk’s role in that.

November plans: We’ll continue to work on ramping up or work on adding layers of interactivity to more content on the site. We’re waiting for a good breaking news event to test using time-stamped updates that are trafficked into place by the desk (rather than the writethru approach to updating we tend to use now). Editing lectures will end for the copy editing class, and it will transition into the six-week design lab.
*******************

SHOW ME THE ERRORS:
October update: Participation by readers in the Show Me the Errors contest has been vigorous with about 130 reports as of Oct. 19 since the contest began Oct. 1.

Big submitters Kate McIntyre, an MU student, and James Terry, a Stephens College professor, have tailed off a bit but continue to post. Other participants’ reports often reflect a personal interest in the article, though there are occasional reports from non-involved readers who are willing to participate in the editing process.

The reports cover a wide range of error. Readers incorrectly posting comments in the Show Me the Errors option continues, albeit at a lesser pace.

The most frequently reported errors are missing spaces between words, an error compounded by the Django system’s notes mode. Copy editors have been advised to add the additional step of reading the text in “no notes mode” to check for these errors. That seems to be helping to cut down on those errors.

A lack of familiarity with Missouri style also has contributed to some reports of perceived errors that are not actual errors.

For example, the Missourian does not hyphenate compound modifiers for frequently used phrases. Using brackets instead of parenthesis, which is Missourian style, has also been suggested as has moving punctuations in the use of quotations – period outside the quote marks.

Of the reports pointing out errors, the most frequent ones have been incorrectly spelled names. Research has shown misspelled names to be the most frequent error in all newspapers, so the Show Me the Errors’ results are not surprising, but it is still disappointing that accuracy checks are not consistent.

Factual errors are the most disturbing for any publication, and there have been about a dozen of those reported. When that occurs, the interactive copy editing chief on duty contacts the city editor/reporter and works with them to ascertain the correct information and make corrections. That information is passed along to the print editors for needed corrections.

November plans: There have been home page banners on the website to promote the contest, and plans are afoot for additional print promos in the floorboard of the Missourian. We continue to monitor the posting of comments to the correction field. We also hope to spark discussion of the concept of participatory editing by writing columns and submitting posts to grammar, language and media blogs.

**************

MISSOURIAN ETHICS – Creating event(s) around proposed ethics policies on conflicts of interest and “un-publishing” of content. – John Schneller

October update: At this point, believe I’m in position to begin making some preliminary conclusions and recommendations that will include proposed language for our conflict of interest policy as well as identifying unsettled issues and ways to incorporate this issue into our teaching and newsroom culture. Although it’s beyond our immediate boundaries, there also appears to because for addressing the potential conflicts associated with social networking for incoming journalism students through FIGS, etc. I’ll provide a document of findings and recommendations by the end of October in hopes of setting the table for additional internal conversation
(Wednesday coffee?). No word from JSGA.

November plans: Focus on business conflicts.

  • Ask SPJ to host a session on business conflicts with special invites to representatives of KBIA, KOMU, MU News Bureau, graduate staff, etc.
  • Review info from Poynter, etc. on best practices for how/when to unpublish and provide report of same for internal consideration.

Launch date: Nov. 30

********************

PRINT DESIGN AND PRODUCTION— Giving ownership of the print edition to print designers (and the design class) — Jake Sherlock

October update: Space continues to be an issue as it relates to volume of news and good presentation. We’ve taken the paper up in size a few times to accommodate bigger events, such as the weekend paper of Oct. 10 for coverage of MU football and the Hartsburg Pumpkin Festival. We’re planning another 20-page edition for Homecoming.

On a day-to-day basis, we’ve taken to juggling stories to different days to make the most of our limited print space. For instance, if you look in the Oct. 20 print edition, you’ll find three stories  on the proposed parks tax. Two of the stories published to the website the night before — the third was a holdover from earlier in the week. It makes perfect sense to roll these out as soon as possible online — through the magic of linking and search, readers can easily find the latest news and dig into slightly older news all in one convenient stop. But for print, by packaging these stories in one edition, it gives the print reader a place to get all of the in-depth info needed to make an informed decision at the ballot box.

In portfolio reviews with the print design team this week, we’ve talked extensively about news judgment in tight news holes. Specifically, about how the narrative should not be the default element to run in full at the expense of visuals and non-narrative elements, or, as Tom might call it, avoiding the tyranny of the narrative. There still seems to be some hesitancy (or perhaps apprehension is the better word) toward cutting stories for space. Overall, however, I’m seeing a lot of growth out of our design team. They’re doing a fantastic job advocating for print, and they’re learning the art of being good newsroom ambassadors (I like to say that design is the UN of the newsroom). Most importantly, they’re learning to tell stories visually in a deadline-pressure situation, and they’re doing very well with that.

******************

VOX IPAD APP – Designing Vox for the iPad with ideas and techniques to share with the magazine industry. – Kristin Kellogg

October update: Kristin demonstrated the Vox iPad app to the advertising staff, including in her mockups some full-page ads pulled from Vox. The ad staff generally liked the design of the app and how ads would show up on it, but we  agreed that some ads (especially full page ones) will need to be rebuilt for the tablet’s size. The ad staff generally liked the design of the app and how navigation would work. We discussed the potential market for the app (number of subscribers) and ad pricing/bundling; those are decisions that Dan and Jack will likely need to take up with the sales staff.

On the programming front, Noah continues to learn the iOS software and has started focusing on some of the Vox-specific parts of that language, including text placement engines. He plans to be done with tutorials and into programming the app full time by Oct. 22.

Launch date: Week of Nov. 15

********************

JUNIT™ -  Creating a semantic Web platform for newspaper publishing with compatibility to print and Web 2.0. Tom Warhover

October update: Developers released the Oct. 15 release on Oct. 15. It’s the first time we’ve been able to see something that looks like the thing we imagined many moons ago. The system has some of the functionality that is planned, with more on the way. It still looks somewhat awkward; Missourian types sent feedback on design issues to the developers. Next release is expected in two weeks. After that, we should be able to begin some serious testing.

November plans: Testing Build 4 series of releases from Junit developers.

Here’s your monthly update, courtesy of those most involved in the projects:

Vox iPad app – Designing Vox for the iPad with ideas and techniques to share with the magazine industry. – Kristin Kellogg

September report: We presented mockups (in pdf form) of the Vox app to members of the magazine faculty to get their feedback. They signed off on the idea of launching in stages (having a basic version of the app with department content) then adding more features later on. Also agreed that we would make the app using real text, instead of having every page be an entire image (doing the whole thing as an image makes the file size huge — we felt this would be impractical for a weekly). Overall, everyone seemed OK with the look of the app. I’m basing this off the style guide of the print edition, with some modifications. The plan is to navigate the app by swiping (to go between pages) or clicking on a section icon at the bottom of the screen. Each department will have a landing page, functioning as a mini-TOC listing the stories contained in this section (so you don’t have to swipe through — you can click directly on the link from here). The navigation icons also function to let you know where you are within the app — it indicates which section you’re in and goes in order of the pages in the app.

Also worked with Noah to make sure we’re on the same page about what’s possible for the app, from a programming perspective. We should be able to pull in Twitter feeds and allow commenting between the app and the site, which is exciting news.

October plans: I’m revising the design of the app. We’ve agreed that we want the layout to change depending on if it’s in portrait or landscape view. I’m working on creating templates that can accommodate this. The tricky part is keeping about the same amount of text on the screen in either orientation (although it’s probably unlikely that users will be flipping the iPad back and forth within stories, I think it’s still a good goal to have). I need to look into different font combinations. For example, in the current mockup, I’m using the print magazine’s body copy font. This may not be the best choice for screen reading, so will need to look into other options. The body copy is my primary concern — the fonts for the display type seem to have translated pretty well to screen.

Launch date: Week of Nov. 15

CMYK (The CoMo You Know) — The Columbia Missourian’s community encyclopedia — Laura Johnston

September update: Most of the month was spent trying to determine what software would be best suited for publication. Nothing was settled yet and that issue remains a hurdle to getting this launched.

Chris Carmody and I have divided the editing work so that most of the entries will be verified and vetted in time for (more…)

This week, I don’t have much to report. Everyone seems settled with this transition — too settled — but I’m still going to be the annoying gnat in your face, reminding you there’s more to be done.

A big thank you to the design class for commenting on my last post. We are full steam ahead with ideas to improve the print product. We have a very smart, insightful class that isn’t willing to settle simply for what works. Right now, the print product is good, but we’re going to keep making changes and coming up with new ideas all throughout the semester because, as our Friday critique sessions tell us, there’s always room for improvement.

A few questions that came up at last week’s TA meeting were remedied this week. There is now a rough system for making corrections online that were found on the print desk. Print will mark the changes on page proofs, and it is up to the night news editor (who could delegate it to a copy editor) to make sure those fixes are reflected in the online version. For corrections made on a page in InDesign, it’s up to the designers to decide whether the changes even need to be made online (adding a comma here and there can probably slide) or whether they want to go online themselves to make the changes or put corrections in notes mode and ask a TA to do it. More often than not, I see the changes in print being too insignificant to merit taking the time to fix them online, but if you’re a designer twiddling your thumbs until your next story comes in, you might as well get into Django and make all our content squeaky clean.

Also, this week on the print desk, we had a case where our centerpiece was suddenly moved off the budget, and we weren’t informed. I was the 1A designer, waiting and waiting for my story that never came. Luckily, everyone in photo was great and helped me put together a photo package for the centerpiece, but I was still pretty peeved that no one even considered how removing a story from the budget at around 8:30 p.m. would affect print. I don’t want to call anyone out; I just want better communication. How is it that we’re excellent at communicating news to our audience, but there’s such a disconnect in our own newsroom? Sometimes, we can experience such tunnel vision in our own work that we have no idea what our colleagues are doing. We have some great minds in our newsroom, and the more they cross into different areas for a chat, the more ideas will actually develop into something.

Interactive Copy Desk, I’m coming for you this week. Please start thinking about your day-to-day tasks, how online updates are going (read Nick’s post if you haven’t already) and what we need to do to better engage the community. I’ll be in touch.

Things were quiet at today’s TA meeting, so I’ll start the conversation here.

First, now more than ever because print is so separate, there needs to be a system for correcting errors in stories found by the print desk on the website. Currently, when something is corrected on the page, the TAs brought up that no one is quite sure whether it should be the print desk or interactive copy desk that should correct it in the online version. I suppose this could also happen if a story that has already made it to the print desk is corrected online. In this case, someone needs to notify the designers to correct it on the page. But this is an easy fix as long as people know their duties. We’ve also had issues with several stories coming in very close to the print deadline, but as long as the designers are getting constant updates about length and any art that might go along with the story, they should be able to work with that if need be. But if there’s no reason for those stories to be coming in so late, that needs to change. Finally, we’ve had issues with non-sports people working on sports pages and not being entirely comfortable with it; however, we discussed that either Greg or Grant are most always around and can help in those situations.

So, as the outcome of the TA meeting suggested, the transition is going swimmingly, but there’s always room to improve and take our newsroom further. Laura and I had a long talk today about our newsroom withstanding change so well because, as we theorized, it alters drastically every semester anyway with a new crop of reporters, copy editors, designers, photographers, etc.

Because we’re already so resilient to change, I’d really like to see us go to uncharted waters now. And that has to begin with discussion from everyone.

City editors: How is the beat and GA system working this semester? Do you see it changing next semester? What more could reporters be doing to make their stories have better play both on the website and in print?

Photo: What’s up? How has the transition changed the way you function? What else could we be doing to make the website and print more visually interesting?

ACEs: How’s life at the Hub? What are you telling reporters about deadline, and how could we be getting a consistent influx of stories to freshen the website throughout the day?

Nick: I love that you’re telling copy editors to put an “interesting” word in a print headline. What else are they being told about print, and why are they apparently so terrified to come into our little print corner?

Interactive copy desk: Define the interactive part of your job. Now, how can we expand that?

Jake and designers: How can we make the print edition different from the website? Why should people pick up the paper? What more could we be doing? I’m fascinated with an idea I’ve been thinking about that’s probably already been coined somewhere else, but I want to make an interactive print edition. How can we make our paper a service to reader? What can it have that the website doesn’t? If we’re truly going to separate online and print, we need to be offering something more than the same stories readers could find online but in a well-designed paper form.

And everyone else: What are your questions, comments and concerns about the transition or the newsroom in general?

These questions are only scratching the surface of our newsroom potential. We have a gift of being a unique news organization with an abundant staff of young journalists who want to learn. We need to remember besides being a news outlet, we’re also a teaching institution, and if each person in the newsroom could learn something new each day and put it into practice, I don’t see any boundaries on how far we could take this transition.

Please, extend your comments. Ask more questions. Put me in my place. Let’s get a conversation going.

Now that the first-week dust has settled, I think we’ve been able to better notice aspects of the transition that are working and areas that could be improved. Laura, I definitely agree promoting the big picture is an area where we’re succeeding. I think most everyone in the newsroom is aware of what we’re doing with the website and print, and I’ve only heard excitement about it.

As far as I know, no reporters have been grumbling that their byline might not make it to print, which was something I was worried might happen. Instead, they’re motivated to get their stories to the website as quickly as possible (which will hopefully happen even more quickly once the reporters become experienced).

This week, I zeroed in on improvements that could be made at the print desk. We’ve hit the ground running with our designers, making deadline each night no matter how content is flowing in. We have a talented bunch, and I’m really excited to see us become more adventurous in our designs.

We did have an inaccurate headline written on the print desk this week. I don’t want to call anyone out for that, but I think we all need to realize even though everyone on the desk is working hard on their individual tasks, it never hurts to get more eyes on a page and dispatch it to the copy editor and TAs. I know the first week I became so wrapped up in doing everything for my pages that I barely used the copy editor and TAs, and I almost ran out of time because of that. This week, I used the copy editor and TAs for some headlines and edits.

We just need to be aware there’s only one copy editor, so we need to dispatch items at a reasonable rate. And if we’re still uncertain about something, we need to remember we can venture out into the rest of the newsroom and find an editor or reporter to answer our question.

Something else that could be helpful for the print desk giving the ICD access to the print budget. I realize articles that are going into print won’t always take priority in Rim, but as I watched the queues for stories that were going on my pages, I noticed a few times the ICEs were choosing to read unimportant wire briefs before my stories, meaning I had to wait longer to get a jump on my design. Maybe I’m just being selfish for wanting my stories to come in faster, but I think it’s something to consider.

This coming week, designers will be working on making use of display type and info boxes to really illustrate stories. I’d love to hear any of your suggestions for print, as we continue to branch out with our designs and content.

Hey all. For those of you who don’t know me, I’m Mary Daly, your Missourian transition reporter/observer/analyst (haven’t quite come up with a title yet). While working as a reporter and page designer, I’ll also be monitoring the progress of the transition, talking to and shadowing people in all the different departments about their ideas and reporting my findings through this blog each week and meetings every few weeks, where we can all get together to discuss.

Week one got us off to a successful start. I’ve heard a lot of compliments about the new newsroom setup, both from returning staff members and new ones. The hub desk seems to be a hit. It’s definitely been beneficial to have all the people who help facilitate decision in one place, and from the reporter’s viewpoint, new students seemed to know right away that was the place to go to find an ACE or editor.

(more…)