It used to be that reporters would grab a copy of the competitor’s newspaper on the way to work, discover that they had been beaten and have to deal with the shame, anger, scorn and frustration until their follow story (which hopefully advanced the original story) appeared in the next days newspaper. But thanks to the Internet, that follow-up story can now appear online in no time.

But if that is really the case, why doesn’t this happen more often? Why does it look like some newspapers are still waiting until the next day for their follow-up story to appear?

Recently, one of my local newspapers was beaten on a story that was taking place right down the road from their newsroom. It was the kind of beat that was especially painful having come at the hands of a larger, non-local competitor. The story appeared on the competitors website and in their paper. The local newspaper came back with their follow-up the very next . . . morning. What happened here? Did it take the reporter until minutes before the print deadline (let’s say 1 a.m. — for dramatic purposes) and editors felt that no one would be reading the website at that hour, or was it something else, something more, shall we say nefarious?

Probably neither. I’m willing to bet no one realized that the paper had been beaten until the state’s AP bureau picked-up the story and put it on the wires, probably sometime between 11 a.m. and 1 p.m. It is even possible that the AP version was overlooked until the first news meeting of the day, sometime between 3 and 4 p.m. at which point the reporter went into scramble mode to write the follow-up story and as for the web, well the web was a casualty, just like the local readers.

I’m sharing this story because this did not have to happen. If you’re not already, I want to encourage all reporters and editors to take advantage of Google News Alerts. Not familiar with the product? Well “Google Alerts are email updates of the latest relevant Google results (web, news, etc.) based on your choice of query or topic.” Best of all, they are free.

If you are a beat reporter, you should set up an alert for say the name of each community that you cover, major institutions, and prominent figures. You can have Google notify you via email once a day, as-it-happens, or once a week. Had the reporter in the above example had an alert for the name of their beat, they would’ve received an email from google (likely the night before, when the competitor put the story on their breaking news blog) and been prepared to hit the ground running the next morning.

Not only do Alerts help with being beaten, they provide you with story possibilities from outside of your coverage area.

Say the mayor or your town goes on vacation and gets pulled over for DWI. Now it’s not likely that he will call you up and let you know, but there is a good chance that the local newspaper that covers that beach town will include it in their online police blotter and their story will get scraped by Google. Before the mayor can even get back into town, you’re working on a hot story.

You can also come across great human interest stories as well.

Now I recognize that to some of you Google News Alerts are old news, but clearly from the above example, they are still new to some people. If you already using them, what’s your favorite story that you’ve gotten as a result?

As most people now know, Thursday morning Pakistani opposition leader Benazir Bhutto was assassinated on a street in Rawalpindi, Pakistan. Although this tragic event occurred early in the morning, most New Jersey daily newspapers appeared either ill-prepared to localize the story or simply chose to leave that responsibility to say, the AP.

This matters because New Jersey has a sizeable Pakistani community. Whether you follow the U.S. Census which places it at about 12,000 as reported by the AP or you accept the research of the Pakistani American Leadership Center, which places it at 95,000 (and don’t forget the state’s significant Indian community) this was an international story with significant local interest.

Yet as of Thursday evening, three of the states largest newspapers (Bergen Record, Newark Star Ledger and Asbury Park Press) were using a local AP story on their sites. Only two of the handful of NJ’s Gannett newspapers were running a Gannett News Service piece about reaction from two of the state’s legislators to the killing. And note to the Bergen Record (and Herald News which shares the same website) one of the two legislators interviewed by GNS was your very own Congressman Bill Pascrell. Why? Because Pascrell is a member of the Congressional Pakistan Caucus.

Four other daily newspapers didn’t have any local coverage on their website.

Now I know about the debate over international versus local coverage. But my general rule has been, if it’s an international with local impact, it’s then worth some of our limited resources. It would appear that for newspapers in New Jersey this would have been the case. Yet, as I already outlined, those who did provide coverage on their homepages chose, for the most part, to use AP.

What frustrates me about this, is that I believe that many of these newspapers likely spent the day reporting and writing their own stories; they just decided to hold them for the next day’s newspaper. To editors at these newspapers, using the AP version allowed them to save their own work for their printed product, the AP version was good enough.

This is the backward type of thinking that we as a newspaper industry need to overcome. It is a lecture that has been given time again, but maybe now can be simply put — good enough, is NOT good enough.

8:52 a.m. (EST) -  Just came back from picking up some of the newspapers I mentioned above. Sure enough, they have their own stories about local reaction to the assassination. I’d love to hear their explanations for putting their print products first and holding this content for today’s papers.

We all are familiar with this scenario: The police scanner suddenly crackles with the news of a fire, reports of smoke coming from a house at 123 John Smith Lane. Additional radio chatter includes something about residents possibly trapped. A desk editor looks around the newsroom trying to make eye contact with a reporter to send out to the scene.

“Hey Joe,” the editor finally says. “I’ve got a fire and I need you to go out to it.” Joe raises from his seat, slow enough so as to allow the editor to realize that he has two other stories he’s already working on.

“The address is 123 John Smith Lane, I think that’s off Main Avenue,” the editor says, now shouting a bit and clearly ignoring Joe’s body language. “And grab a photographer on your way out.”

And with that, Joe is gone, hopefully with a photographer in tow. The editor in question turns their attention back to editing copy, the daily budget or any one of another dozen items they could be working on. They won’t likely think about Joe until either he calls in, or the editor needs to update the budget, a senior editor or both.

Now with some changes, and even at newspaper’s with law and order reporters, events like this take place nearly every day.

But the lack of a conversation between the Joe and his editor before he left will have at least two results:

1. Website updates for the fire will likely be far and few, because Joe will be focusing on reporting and staying upwind of the smoke.
2. Joe will return to the office only to have call officials who were at the scene to get answers to questions he didn’t know his editor wanted asked.

A quick conversation before a reporter heads out the door will provide for a better print story and set the stage for better online coverage. And especially when it comes to online coverage, conversations between editors and reporters should continue periodically while the reporter is out of the newsroom.

Here’s what I’m suggesting. Breathe. Take no more then five minutes (an editor can even walk the reporter to their car) and talk about:

• When the reporter’s should check-in.
• What should they first do when they arrive?
• Who else should they try and speak with at the scene?
• Based on early information, where in the printed paper will the story likely be appear?
• If you’re sending more then one reporter, make sure each knows where to focus their efforts (one can do officials and the other the neighborhood or crowd).

If you have your own questions, that’s fine. If not, give those a shot, but most importantly, have the conversation. And if you are, what questions or tips does your conversation include?

Why would you want to spend the day in the office? Why would you want to be tethered to a phone, waiting for the next story to be delivered to you? Why would you want colleagues listening in on your calls and editors eyeing you and wondering what you’re “really” doing online?

Wouldn’t you rather be outside meeting people on your beat and developing your own stories? Heck, take a source to lunch and (depending on your expense policy), let your company pay for your meals.

But really, with so many newsrooms now equipped with laptops and wireless PC cards or Treos or other smart phones, why are so many reporters still playing desk jockeys? And just as importantly, why are so many editors willing to allow their reporters to work this way?

I have frequently told reporters to:

• Take a wireless PC card equipped laptop and head out into their beat.
• Hold office hours at the local diner. Tell people in your beat where you’ll be and let them come to you.
• When you’ve got a budget line, file it.
• When you have a story, send it in.

Between a cell phone and the computer it’s like they’re in the office, only better because they’re not. Being in their beat gives them better access to stories, provides a visible presence for the newspaper (did someone say “Presence Marketing”?) and makes them available for local breaking news. To me it makes sense. I think to many editors it makes sense.

So what is your excuse? If you’re a reporter, why aren’t you out in your beat? If you’re an editor, why aren’t you pushing your reporters out the door? And if you’ve got a successful strategy, share it.

I don’t know about where you live, but today in New Jersey we’re expecting a snow storm, with forecasters predicting between 6 and 10 inches of snow. And in newsrooms throughout the area, reporters and photographers are pulling up their boots, buttoning up their coats and putting on their hats for a day of “exciting” weather reporting.

I’ve known my share of reporters and photographers and can tell you that “excited” is not a word they would use to describe covering a snow storm.They shouldn’t feel bad, because I can tell you that I’m far from “excited” about reading the coverage, because at too many newspapers weather reporting has become uninspiring and “predict”-able.

Rather then looking for new stories to tell and new ways to tell them, newspapers will dig up the same story ideas that they have used to cover snow storms past. We’ll have the ride along with the snow plow operator replete with a visit to the salt dome. There will be the supermarket shelves laid bare on Wednesday by shoppers who had feared the worst and the “brave” few who have ventured out in the snow to grab the remaining scraps. There will be the kids sleigh riding or shoveling to earn some pocket change, the story about the morning or afternoon commute and the interviews with commuters. Oh, and don’t forget the cautionary tales from the emergency room about the hazards of snow shoveling on the back and heart and the dangers of snow blowers.

Not exactly inspiring, entertaining or even informative coverage, agree?

But does it have to be that way? Does weather coverage need to be a) so print-centric, b) dated and c) boring?

I believe that editors should start by treating weather events (in this case a snow storm) as an online story and as the day progresses, pick the best and the most relevant content to appear in print. They should ask what would readers want to read the day AFTER the snow storm, what do they need to know about the weather event they just lived through and what would be useful to them going forward?

With all that in mind, here are some (basic) user-generated coverage ideas:

• Encourage them to submit photos for an online gallery with the “best” photos as “judged by the staff” going into the next day’s paper.
• Why send your reporters all over town to look at the snow and gauge how deep it is or how much has been plowed? Make connections with your local weather spotter group and empower them to be your eyes and ears on the street.
• Make connections with members of your DPW and have them file periodic reports (they all carry cell phones) about road conditions and plowing.
• Identify in advance people who have to go to work despite the weather and touch base with them during the day to craft mini-essays about their experience. They can run with a photo in a flash gallery or photo slide show.

For stories consider:

• How much does snow removal cost in your area? From the teen with the shovel to the landscape company with the truck mounted plow what’s the going rate? And are there issues (for example insurance) people should consider before hiring either?
• What businesses benefit from snow? Tire stores? Accident attorneys? Babysitters?
• What to do when your stuck at home with kids? Recipes, activities and more. (This story you can trot every time the weather is bad and put it online).

These are just some ideas to get you thinking. What suggestions would you have for newspapers covering snow?

Why do they do it? Because basic crime reporting is, dare I say, easy reporting. It is easy and it has a high return on investment, these stories draw viewers and sell newspapers.

Crime reporting is one the few beats that can nearly be put on auto drive. Newsrooms have anywhere from one to as many as three crime reporters who in most cases sit at their desks listening to police radios on scanners, watching the feeds that come across paging services (such as the Breaking News Network) and waiting for police to fax completed police reports. Occasionally, they make a round of phone calls to police departments to ask if there is “anything going on” or “anything newsworthy.”

Many crime stories can be reported, written and produced all without leaving the office, and in many cases they are:

• A reporter receives a police report via fax or email.

• He/She checks the archives for prior stories and then calls the police department’s public information officer or the local prosecutor to get the answer to any outstanding questions.

• Maybe a reverse phone directory or online phone directory is checked and a call is made for a “live” quote.

• A photographer can be assigned to shoot the scene or memorial and graphics can produce a locator map and the package is done – print or broadcast.

As I said, it can be easy.

But not all newspapers take this approach some, including the venerable New York Times, make an effort to balance their coverage, covering crime when necessary and putting it on the front page or section front page only when it is necessary. But this approach takes more time, planning and in some cases, manpower; it is far from easy and is more of a challenge on the weekend.

And as long as people continue to tune in and buy papers, many newsrooms will continue to take the easy way out.

Allow me to introduce you to the Pocono Record a 35-person newsroom in Stroudsburg, Pa., (if you can find the Delaware Water Gap, you can locate the Record). This is a newsroom that breaks many of the traditional media gathering rules. They’ve embraced the web and technology (use blogs, forums, videos, text alerts, twitter, rss and email newsletters and alerts) and have empowered everyone from the executive editor down to the paper’s receptionist to participate.

While that is a lesson for other newspapers large and small that are still wrapped up in silo mentality, today I want to take a moment to call your attention to their recent coverage of a fatal fire.

On Thursday, Nov. 8, authorities now maintain an 8-year-old playing with a cigarette lighter started a fire that destroyed two homes and took the lives of two people. A fire for any newspaper can be a challenging story to cover, especially covering it live. Access to the scene and the participants, timing (fires can be out before your reporter leaves the newsroom) and good visuals are all challenges.

None of those obstacles stopped the staff of the Record from covering this fire and covering it as if they were a “24-hour news channel”¹.

Their photo staff shot stills AND video. Their reporters gathered yarn for their print stories and the web providing updates online, by email and phone messaging as the fire leapt to a neighboring house; as more firefighters responded and streets were closed; and as fatalities were announced and the community grieved.

Visitors to poconorecord.com on that day found a scalable map that showed where the fire was, videos of the fire and an interview with a rescuer, still images and, of course, good reporting and even better writing. It was all the pieces of online coverage that Pennsylvania web users likely expect from CNN or the New York Times, but instead found on the homepage of their local newspaper. All of that content is now available on one landing page.

Traffic to the website reflected an increase in daily uniques of some 5,000 visitors and an increase of some 60,000 page views – not only did more people come to the site, but they spent more time. And the traffic boost did not evaporate after the first day of coverage. Even their YouTube profile saw an increase in traffic.

I point this effort out, not because as I said it is by one of the newspapers that I’m proud to work with, but because so many of the larger newspapers that I have either worked at or frequent online should learn from. So, I offer these takeaways from the Pocono Record:

• Involve and train everyone in your newsgathering and presentation effort.
• Give the reader everything they want and everything you’ve got. If you collapse at the end, it was likely an effort well done.
• Use video. Yes still images might win you a Pulitzer, but your readers want more and everyone else is using video.
• Report for the web and update in print. Simple concept (albeit from Gannett) that means get it online FAST. It’s a competitive market out there, if you don’t offer it, someone else will.
• Use every technology available and don’t try to offer excuses for bypassing any of them. For example, if hosting video is an issue, use YouTube; it’s FREE.

It’s more then just saying that if a small newspaper like the Pocono Record can produce this type of package there is no reason why other, large, news outlets can’t. It comes down to the reality that, if small newspapers like the Pocono Record are doing this then larger newspapers must do it.

And if any of these news outlets need help, I’d say give the folks at the Pocono Record a call, I’m sure they’d offer you some guidance.

1- Observation made by Pocono Record Online Director, Kathy Schwartz and one that, frankly, I agree with.