John Mecklin of Miller-McCune research writes an intriguing post about Duke University's search to fill an endowed chair of computational journalism.
He makes many points worth considering.
Let's take one, for now.
"If you live in one of the 11 American cities EveryBlock covers, you now can enter your address, and the site gives you civic information (think building permits, police reports and so on), news reports, blog items and other Web-based information, such as consumer reviews and photos, all connected to your immediate geographic neighborhood. In the not-too-distant future, (Duke's James) Hamilton suggests, an algorithm could take information from EveryBlock and other database inputs and actually write articles personalized to your neighborhood and your interests, giving you, for example, a story about crime in your neighborhood this week and whether it has increased or decreased in relation to a month or a year ago."
Intriguing idea. Charlotte is covered by EveryBlock, and my neighborhood blog has a widget with an Everyblock feed. Could EveryBlock's data be combined with tools like Tansa or similar to "write" stories or create readable, understandable lists of local information that wouldn't be shared any other way? Like zoning cases? Or city council actions that affect a small, specific neighborhood?
The idea intrigued me so much that I considered offering it to Howard Rheingold for his master's degree students to explore. He recently tweeted a question asking for ideas for those students.
Then I did a little homework. The latest zoning minutes available today from EveryBlock for Charlotte are from May 19, 2008. The latest city council meetings are from July 21, 2008. EveryBlock lists frequency updates for both kinds of information as "sporadically," and the source as the Charlotte city clerk.
What that lag shows is the need for a real person to contact public officials to remind them of the need for sharing information in a certain way, with a certain audience. EveryBlock isn't funded to be a government watchdog and to make that call.
Charlotte's feeds for crime, building permits and food inspections are relatively up to date, and light years beyond what less-wired, lighter-funded nearby governments are doing.
But the quick reality check shows that even in a year, or two, or five, as the tools advance, technology will not replace human contact that reminds government employees to provide public information to the public.
If nobody's watching, it won't happen.
Showing posts with label Charlotte. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Charlotte. Show all posts
Tuesday, January 6, 2009
Sunday, November 16, 2008
CLT Wordcamp roundup
The Wordcamp conference at The Charlotte Observer was a great success. Jason Keath of The Stratius Group organized the event, presented on Wordpress blog basics and got a Wordpress keynote speaker, Mark Jaquith. The Observer contributed space, some volunteers and some organizational help. Steve Gunn led The Observer effort and made the partnership happen.
More:
Slides from keynote speaker Mark Jaquith, plus links to deeper stuff.
The official CLTWordcamp blog.
Ben Ullman on The Ultimate Tweetup.
Corey Creed of Hippo Internet Marketing on what he liked.
The Guy Trapped in the Elevator speaks.
Short story in The Charlotte Observer. (Ben Ullman noted the story did not mention Wordpress. Good point.)
And yes, My Other Blog is on Wordpress.
More:
Slides from keynote speaker Mark Jaquith, plus links to deeper stuff.
The official CLTWordcamp blog.
Ben Ullman on The Ultimate Tweetup.
Corey Creed of Hippo Internet Marketing on what he liked.
The Guy Trapped in the Elevator speaks.
Short story in The Charlotte Observer. (Ben Ullman noted the story did not mention Wordpress. Good point.)
And yes, My Other Blog is on Wordpress.
Sunday, August 17, 2008
A yellowed clip predicting the future
This old clip from The Pierce Report on Charlotte in 1995 gives a great history lesson on building community online. Steve Snow was talking about building links among people 13 years ago and struggling with funding questions. We're still discussing those questions.
Related links with lessons:
Dallas Morning News, 1999:
Freelance article on politics and funding, 1997.
Letter from Steve Snow offering sage advice.
Case study from the Charlotte library. "It's not about technology, but about people."
Sunday, July 27, 2008
Making readers' opinions work
Readers and commenters at the McClatchy Next wiki are abuzz about anonymous comments at newspaper web sites and blogs.
Don't click away -- I know this subject has been done to death. I promise a different approach.
Many of the comments have been fueled by the vitriolic name-calling recently in comments at Etaoin Shrdlu, the blog of McClatchy's vice president for news, Howard Weaver.
Let's face it: Weaver's public blog and position make him an easy target these days, much like Tony and Peter and Par were in previous days. I'm sure he doesn't feel quite as rich, but I'm sure he feels just as targeted with anger.
So let's take a different path, as job cuts hit editorial departments and as McClatchy sites look at new technical toys for enabling and highlighting comments.
Let's take a look at what works: The Observer's letters to the editor, and a couple of Observer blogs. I'm sure there are other examples of print features and sites that work, but I offer these up as ones I know best. I'd love to hear about others.
One of the major reasons I was attracted to The Charlotte Observer 20-some odd years ago was the vibrancy of the editorial pages. Much of that vibrancy came from the letters to the editor.
These days, Lew Powell is still editing those letters (as far as I know. I've been away from work email for a few days), and The Observer still kicks butt with the feature.
I'll be more specific: The Charlotte Observer still kicks The News and Observer's butt and many other papers with its letters to the editor. The Observer's printed letters cover a wide variety of subjects, are concise, quick and to-the-point. The News and Observer has plenty of letters online, but they're less concise. A recent printed News and Observer also had fewer, longer letters than The Charlotte Observer's daily printed product.
In addition, some Charlotte Observer blogs have fostered vibrant, often thoughtful commenting communities, with questions and thoughts that resemble the salons, not saloons, of days of yore.
So let's find out why, while we still have Lew Powell with us and while those bloggers still have time to engage those communities.
Then, perhaps, we can figure out how to make money from those communities without destroying them, or share their content on a wider basis, or emulate their success to give other readers a place for thoughtful comments that they seem to crave.
Here's the letters policy, in part:
"Please sign and include your address and daytime telephone number. We edit for brevity, grammar, clarity and accuracy, and we reject letters published elsewhere. Letters typically address a single idea and do not exceed 150 words."
Yes, 150 words.
That policy is backed up by Lew, (and others on the editorial board. Added 7/30). Here's what was published for the Sunday, July 27, edition:
12 letters
11 subjects
At least 7 with reference to specific previous stories, editorials or letters.
8 from male writers
4 from female writers
1 from a writer under age 13.
The longest letter included 147 words: the letter from the young person.
3 letters included less than 50 words.
All letters are signed with a name and home town. Phone numbers and addresses are not published.
(This example actually was produced by esteemed Editorial Page Editor Ed Williams, who retires this year. Lew was on vacation. But they back up each other's standards, and Lew says he won't let Ed get letters published more than once a month after his retirement. Added 7/30.)
Stuff I don't know:
How many letters are received each week? How many are rejected? How many have to be edited to that 150 word limit or shortened further? How many are from repeat writers? How could new tech tools ease the workload, integrate the letters more with online comments, or enrich information, links and visuals to the letter writers, so readers can know more about specific letter writers while protecting privacy for those writers who want it? Is it worth the time it would take? Does Lew call every letter writer each time they write?
Compared to comments on blogs, Lew's published version of the letters gives me a chance to hear what people are thinking on a wide variety of topics, quickly and concisely. It's what's left out that's important here.
No wasted words.
Blogs, on the other hand, give commenters unlimited space and quicker interactivity with other posters as well as the original blogger. I can't afford the time to visit them frequently, but here are some details about two of my favorites.
The Naked City, from Mary Newsom: The latest post, "Any hope for '60s suburbia?" poses a detailed question in 121 words and asks for comments. It was posted Thursday, July 24. As of Sunday, July 27, at noonish, it had 31 comments. 10 comments used pseudonyms or names. 20 used anonymous. One was pure spam, but the others were generally thoughtful and positive.
32 visitors came to the blog as of about 1 p.m. Sunday, July 27 (the slowest day of the week). 1,146 came on Thursday, the day of the last posting. 1,746 hits came on Tuesday, with a posting done at 6:05 p.m. The timing of comments and hits appears to indicate that many readers are using RSS feeds to watch for new postings. (Hit stats are from a Sitemeter bug at the blog. I wonder whether that immediate feedback tool will disappear with our site redesign. Will be a shame if that happens).
And another:
Sacred Space, from Jane Pope: The latest post, "Are we born cruel or kind?" poses a detailed question in 126 words and asks for comments. It was posted Friday, July 25. As of Sunday, July 27, at noonish, it had 42 comments, one of which had been removed by the author. Comments frequently referred to specific other commenters by their pseudonyms or names. Only two people posted completely as anonymous.
Gamecock made 15 comments.
Iztok made 8 comments.
Pete made 7 comments.
Others made one or two comments.
Things I don't know about Sacred Space: Hit counts. But I'd suggest that Gamecock and Iztok get a little credit for those hits -- not from just themselves, but from all the other readers coming back to watch their dialog.
Something else I don't know: How much total time these bloggers estimate they spend on writing and moderating comments, and how they are moderating comments. Are they autopublishing any comment, and then catching up later to edit? Or are they approving each comment separately? (Surely not).
I do know both Mary and Jane have had to remind -- and perhaps scold -- commenters to remain civil. Mary has had to delete the worst of the inflammatory, nasty comments. I assume Jane has had to do so as well. If one wants a well-kept saloon, or salon, setting some standards is necessary. Real people seem to work better than automated technology, in this case.
So what's next?
It's clear that creating online (or print) communities with a high level of discourse and value requires some human intervention. It's clear that creating enclaves of reasoned thought is possible even in a broader online (or print) free-for-all of anonymous comments.
Not so clear, and worth discussion:
Could some advertisers aiming at specific audiences be missing out by not advertising on some of our blogs? Will our online redesign give an opportunity for such ads in a not-in-your-face way? Is there a sales rep. in the house who can gather some more numbers and target tasteful advertisers who aren't already spending money with us? How will we preserve the time for folks like Lew, Jane and Mary to moderate, edit and encourage those communities? How much time are those communities worth? How can we avoid throwing the baby out with the bathwater as we streamline our staffing? And how can we connect some of these subject-specific communities for cross-pollination? (Some of the most frequent commenters do jump around or migrate from blog to blog already.) How can we reward the most thoughtful commenters? How can print benefit from the online comments?
Interesting questions, as we go forward.
Let's hope we make the right decisions.
Don't click away -- I know this subject has been done to death. I promise a different approach.
Many of the comments have been fueled by the vitriolic name-calling recently in comments at Etaoin Shrdlu, the blog of McClatchy's vice president for news, Howard Weaver.
Let's face it: Weaver's public blog and position make him an easy target these days, much like Tony and Peter and Par were in previous days. I'm sure he doesn't feel quite as rich, but I'm sure he feels just as targeted with anger.
So let's take a different path, as job cuts hit editorial departments and as McClatchy sites look at new technical toys for enabling and highlighting comments.
Let's take a look at what works: The Observer's letters to the editor, and a couple of Observer blogs. I'm sure there are other examples of print features and sites that work, but I offer these up as ones I know best. I'd love to hear about others.
One of the major reasons I was attracted to The Charlotte Observer 20-some odd years ago was the vibrancy of the editorial pages. Much of that vibrancy came from the letters to the editor.
These days, Lew Powell is still editing those letters (as far as I know. I've been away from work email for a few days), and The Observer still kicks butt with the feature.
I'll be more specific: The Charlotte Observer still kicks The News and Observer's butt and many other papers with its letters to the editor. The Observer's printed letters cover a wide variety of subjects, are concise, quick and to-the-point. The News and Observer has plenty of letters online, but they're less concise. A recent printed News and Observer also had fewer, longer letters than The Charlotte Observer's daily printed product.
In addition, some Charlotte Observer blogs have fostered vibrant, often thoughtful commenting communities, with questions and thoughts that resemble the salons, not saloons, of days of yore.
So let's find out why, while we still have Lew Powell with us and while those bloggers still have time to engage those communities.
Then, perhaps, we can figure out how to make money from those communities without destroying them, or share their content on a wider basis, or emulate their success to give other readers a place for thoughtful comments that they seem to crave.
Here's the letters policy, in part:
"Please sign and include your address and daytime telephone number. We edit for brevity, grammar, clarity and accuracy, and we reject letters published elsewhere. Letters typically address a single idea and do not exceed 150 words."
Yes, 150 words.
That policy is backed up by Lew, (and others on the editorial board. Added 7/30). Here's what was published for the Sunday, July 27, edition:
12 letters
11 subjects
At least 7 with reference to specific previous stories, editorials or letters.
8 from male writers
4 from female writers
1 from a writer under age 13.
The longest letter included 147 words: the letter from the young person.
3 letters included less than 50 words.
All letters are signed with a name and home town. Phone numbers and addresses are not published.
(This example actually was produced by esteemed Editorial Page Editor Ed Williams, who retires this year. Lew was on vacation. But they back up each other's standards, and Lew says he won't let Ed get letters published more than once a month after his retirement. Added 7/30.)
Stuff I don't know:
How many letters are received each week? How many are rejected? How many have to be edited to that 150 word limit or shortened further? How many are from repeat writers? How could new tech tools ease the workload, integrate the letters more with online comments, or enrich information, links and visuals to the letter writers, so readers can know more about specific letter writers while protecting privacy for those writers who want it? Is it worth the time it would take? Does Lew call every letter writer each time they write?
Compared to comments on blogs, Lew's published version of the letters gives me a chance to hear what people are thinking on a wide variety of topics, quickly and concisely. It's what's left out that's important here.
No wasted words.
Blogs, on the other hand, give commenters unlimited space and quicker interactivity with other posters as well as the original blogger. I can't afford the time to visit them frequently, but here are some details about two of my favorites.
The Naked City, from Mary Newsom: The latest post, "Any hope for '60s suburbia?" poses a detailed question in 121 words and asks for comments. It was posted Thursday, July 24. As of Sunday, July 27, at noonish, it had 31 comments. 10 comments used pseudonyms or names. 20 used anonymous. One was pure spam, but the others were generally thoughtful and positive.
32 visitors came to the blog as of about 1 p.m. Sunday, July 27 (the slowest day of the week). 1,146 came on Thursday, the day of the last posting. 1,746 hits came on Tuesday, with a posting done at 6:05 p.m. The timing of comments and hits appears to indicate that many readers are using RSS feeds to watch for new postings. (Hit stats are from a Sitemeter bug at the blog. I wonder whether that immediate feedback tool will disappear with our site redesign. Will be a shame if that happens).
And another:
Sacred Space, from Jane Pope: The latest post, "Are we born cruel or kind?" poses a detailed question in 126 words and asks for comments. It was posted Friday, July 25. As of Sunday, July 27, at noonish, it had 42 comments, one of which had been removed by the author. Comments frequently referred to specific other commenters by their pseudonyms or names. Only two people posted completely as anonymous.
Gamecock made 15 comments.
Iztok made 8 comments.
Pete made 7 comments.
Others made one or two comments.
Things I don't know about Sacred Space: Hit counts. But I'd suggest that Gamecock and Iztok get a little credit for those hits -- not from just themselves, but from all the other readers coming back to watch their dialog.
Something else I don't know: How much total time these bloggers estimate they spend on writing and moderating comments, and how they are moderating comments. Are they autopublishing any comment, and then catching up later to edit? Or are they approving each comment separately? (Surely not).
I do know both Mary and Jane have had to remind -- and perhaps scold -- commenters to remain civil. Mary has had to delete the worst of the inflammatory, nasty comments. I assume Jane has had to do so as well. If one wants a well-kept saloon, or salon, setting some standards is necessary. Real people seem to work better than automated technology, in this case.
So what's next?
It's clear that creating online (or print) communities with a high level of discourse and value requires some human intervention. It's clear that creating enclaves of reasoned thought is possible even in a broader online (or print) free-for-all of anonymous comments.
Not so clear, and worth discussion:
Could some advertisers aiming at specific audiences be missing out by not advertising on some of our blogs? Will our online redesign give an opportunity for such ads in a not-in-your-face way? Is there a sales rep. in the house who can gather some more numbers and target tasteful advertisers who aren't already spending money with us? How will we preserve the time for folks like Lew, Jane and Mary to moderate, edit and encourage those communities? How much time are those communities worth? How can we avoid throwing the baby out with the bathwater as we streamline our staffing? And how can we connect some of these subject-specific communities for cross-pollination? (Some of the most frequent commenters do jump around or migrate from blog to blog already.) How can we reward the most thoughtful commenters? How can print benefit from the online comments?
Interesting questions, as we go forward.
Let's hope we make the right decisions.
Sunday, July 20, 2008
Turning the pages, online
The Sporting News is launching an e-edition, emailed to subscribers and delivered in an electronic page-turning format. The publication, now based in Charlotte just about a block away from The Observer, has hired some talent from The Observer and elsewhere, with big names in visuals, including Charles Apple.
Mygazines is offering myriad magazines, with the same kind of page-turning feel. Its version of In Style is in the picture.
Scribd offers a similar service, community-based, where readers can upload and download publications in a page-turning format, comment on each other's documents and see most-viewed, most likes and top users.
Smaller publications like The Raleigh Downtowner are offering similar technology to view their work, or they're offering PDFs.
It makes sense in a publishing world of diminishing resources to leverage and reuse the design work already done for a publication. But do the designs of print and web really work together? Is there a way to please both the lovers of print and the lovers of online interactivity at the same time, without having to redesign or re-template for different mediums?
And now, with the IPhone and similar toys, online publishers are forced to reinvent design to fit the small screen, with varying levels of success.
I tested Mygazines on the big consumer of magazines at my house: an 18-year-old who loves visuals, fashion and the computer. Results: too slow to load, and not clickable enough. If it's on a screen, there better be plenty of links.
We didn't even get into the other benefits of printed, glossy magazines -- the passalong ability and portability of visual, beautiful information.
Update Aug. 16: The Magazine Publishers Association has sued the owner of Mygazines, which is incorporated on Anguilla, a British territory in the Caribbean. Details here.
So as all kinds of publishers try to cut costs and leverage work, it's a bit heartening to see that design still matters, and fitting design to the medium is still relevant.
And as I was thinking about this post, something called S3 or "Simple Storage Service" from Amazon went down. Visuals in all kinds of places, from Twitter to Scribd, disappeared. The Internet still worked, mostly, but many sites lost the visual elements of their services.
Change is sometimes frighteningly fast these days, and glitches will happen. As journalists a block away in Charlotte try to make a go of new technology with an interesting format, I wish them luck. We all need it.
Again, we live in interesting times.
More:
(Added July 26) Steve Cavendish, graphics director at the Chicago Tribune, critiques the Sporting News PDF version.
(Older:)
Jakob Nielsen on differences between print and web design, 1999.
Coding Horror, aka Jeff Atwood, on the New York Times' Reader and its format vs. the web format.
Friday, February 1, 2008
So about that business model...
Former Observer business editor Jon Talton rants about what's really wrong with newspapers.
He got a link from Romenesko, so you've probably already read it, and it's not the business of this place to focus on the negative.
But Talton is worth a read not only because his words can be so biting but also because he approaches the topic from a business point of view.
And many discussions are finally moving beyond lamenting the death of a business model to looking for solutions. Online advertising might not be enough (Project for Excellence in Journalism).
Let's hope the vision is broad and progress has begun.
Other links:
American Journalism Review on nonprofit journalism.
TechCrunch on whether government should support media companies.
Columbia J-dean's response.
Really want to dig deep and be surprised? Go to Charlotte's Urban Planet forum for outsiders' views. As always, consider the sources, put on your thick skin and look for the hope.
He got a link from Romenesko, so you've probably already read it, and it's not the business of this place to focus on the negative.
But Talton is worth a read not only because his words can be so biting but also because he approaches the topic from a business point of view.
And many discussions are finally moving beyond lamenting the death of a business model to looking for solutions. Online advertising might not be enough (Project for Excellence in Journalism).
Let's hope the vision is broad and progress has begun.
Other links:
American Journalism Review on nonprofit journalism.
TechCrunch on whether government should support media companies.
Columbia J-dean's response.
Really want to dig deep and be surprised? Go to Charlotte's Urban Planet forum for outsiders' views. As always, consider the sources, put on your thick skin and look for the hope.
Monday, July 9, 2007
Do in-paper refers drive traffic?
Not for a blog about Harry Potter, at least not by 9:40 a.m. on a summer morning, even though a front-page story had a refer to this blog.
(Re-editing this post as new numbers come in. Certainty fades to uncertainty, the more facts you have).
By noon or 1 p.m., traffic had rebounded some, possibly because a link to the blog was posted at the very top of our website in a Harry Potter visual package.
Eventually, the day's numbers surpassed the 818 visitors that came on Saturday, just after the first Harry Potter post went up. Eventual number was 838.
In this case, it looks like many blog readers are using RSS or some other blog-watching software. The blog writer, Mary Newsom, believes the in-paper refer from her Saturday column was a major force in driving the Saturday morning traffic. The post was posted Friday night at 11:35 p.m., and the flood of hits came about 8 am. to 10 a.m. the next morning. I suspect it was a combination of RSS readers and the in-paper refer placed with her op-ed column.
To quote the Dayton managing editor awhile back: "Google is now the front page of the newspaper."
I think it's gone beyond that, to software that monitors particular sites and updates readers with headlines pointing to new content (often called RSS, but not all the software is "real" RSS, and not all of it is complicated).
But that software isn't perfect: The latest posting to Mary's blog was up about noontime. My Google Reader did not update with the new posting until 3:30 p.m. That lag might not mean much for overnight postings aimed at readers' morning reading habits, but for real news monitoring, it's unforgivable. There might be settings at Blogger or elsewhere that can speed this up.
Update: I created a Facebook group, Potterblog Fan Club, to push the blog, as an exercise in driving traffic. It brought a couple of hits, one at 10:40 p.m. Monday night. The timing seems obvious, for anyone who knows teenagers. I have a hunch that traditional newspaper readers are the ones logging in and reading in the morning, and the non-traditional younger readers are primarily the ones visiting later at night. Generally.
The Facebook group is up to five members as of 10 a.m. Tuesday -- obviously, the key is connecting with those viral folks who have lots of friends, not Facebook newbies like me.
Monday, March 12, 2007
What we've done in Charlotte
Compiled by Ronnie Glassberg:
(This almost certainly doesn't cover everything we're doing, but should give everyone a sense of how much we're doing for our discussions.)
--Created Dee-Dee’s position, senior editor for multimedia.
--Added two online producers from other areas of the newsroom - Deirdre McGruder and Alisha Hord.
--Steve Lyttle began spending part of his time posting breaking news in the morning.
--Greg Lacour will begin on the afternoon/evening online shift.
--Peter Weinberger moved into the position of the Observer's first video director.
--Other photographers have moved into online to create video and multimedia presentations.
--Newsroom divisions have goals for posting breaking news to charlotte.com. Departments have goals for everything from breaking news to slideshows to multimedia to e-mail newsletters.
--Regional designers have started posting scrapbook slideshows to the zoned pages.
--Tonya Jameson now spends 90 percent of her time online with paid to party, podcast/video, blog, multimedia, party pic, that’s wassup column, etc.
--Phil Hoffman spends about 90 percent of his time shooting and editing video/multimedia and slideshows. He is the “daily editor” for most of the stuff that comes from photo staff.
--Business staff compiles an e-mail newsletter that’s sent out Monday through Friday.
--We have 24 blogs and nine Q&A features. We also have an Spanish page and blog.
--Kelvin Hart’s new role in sports is aimed at online
--Editorial: Since December 2005, editorial has launched: Mary Newsom’s blog, The Naked City. Jack Betts’ blog, This Old State. And Kevin Siers’ You Write the Caption. Kevin's also posting his cartoons in color on the opinion page of charlotte.com. And they made an online slideshow of the year-end traditional photo portrait page of community do-gooders.
(This almost certainly doesn't cover everything we're doing, but should give everyone a sense of how much we're doing for our discussions.)
--Created Dee-Dee’s position, senior editor for multimedia.
--Added two online producers from other areas of the newsroom - Deirdre McGruder and Alisha Hord.
--Steve Lyttle began spending part of his time posting breaking news in the morning.
--Greg Lacour will begin on the afternoon/evening online shift.
--Peter Weinberger moved into the position of the Observer's first video director.
--Other photographers have moved into online to create video and multimedia presentations.
--Newsroom divisions have goals for posting breaking news to charlotte.com. Departments have goals for everything from breaking news to slideshows to multimedia to e-mail newsletters.
--Regional designers have started posting scrapbook slideshows to the zoned pages.
--Tonya Jameson now spends 90 percent of her time online with paid to party, podcast/video, blog, multimedia, party pic, that’s wassup column, etc.
--Phil Hoffman spends about 90 percent of his time shooting and editing video/multimedia and slideshows. He is the “daily editor” for most of the stuff that comes from photo staff.
--Business staff compiles an e-mail newsletter that’s sent out Monday through Friday.
--We have 24 blogs and nine Q&A features. We also have an Spanish page and blog.
--Kelvin Hart’s new role in sports is aimed at online
--Editorial: Since December 2005, editorial has launched: Mary Newsom’s blog, The Naked City. Jack Betts’ blog, This Old State. And Kevin Siers’ You Write the Caption. Kevin's also posting his cartoons in color on the opinion page of charlotte.com. And they made an online slideshow of the year-end traditional photo portrait page of community do-gooders.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
