<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Guardian.co.uk: Subbing own Guardian blog is not the norm, says Janine Gibson</title>
	<atom:link href="http://blogs.journalism.co.uk/editors/2009/02/16/guardiancouk-subbing-own-guardian-blog-is-not-the-norm-says-janine-gibson/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://blogs.journalism.co.uk/editors/2009/02/16/guardiancouk-subbing-own-guardian-blog-is-not-the-norm-says-janine-gibson/</link>
	<description>Online journalism news</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Sat, 20 Mar 2010 09:10:28 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.9.2</generator>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
		<item>
		<title>By: Janine Gibson</title>
		<link>http://blogs.journalism.co.uk/editors/2009/02/16/guardiancouk-subbing-own-guardian-blog-is-not-the-norm-says-janine-gibson/comment-page-1/#comment-10336</link>
		<dc:creator>Janine Gibson</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 17 Feb 2009 07:35:44 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blogs.journalism.co.uk/editors/?p=8166#comment-10336</guid>
		<description>Yup, we do let a few bloggers publish direct to the web - mostly in the media and technology team and they are revised and legalled. We might let a few more - as I said in Siobhain&#039;s piece, I don&#039;t think that even in a world of infinite resource you&#039;d want to stamp out blogging direct to the web. 

But it doesn&#039;t work for everyone or every type of blog, so we have a range of approaches. The vast majority of web publication gets subbed/revised/furniture subbed etc etc. Some (such as live blogging) are more like broadcast commentary where you trust journalist&#039;s expertise and experience to steer them away from too much trouble. 

Personally I think this debate is valid and worth having - in lots of places I don&#039;t think it&#039;s even being considered. But to me there are good reasons to build subs into the digital world order, not strip them out. 
Linking, presenting, SEO and helping readers navigate content seem to me natural sub-editors&#039; responsibilities and don&#039;t seem to have got any less important or needed. I&#039;d like to see subs seize the opportunity to redefine the role rather than defend the right to sub the small words of every blog post. 



And we revise as we go along.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Yup, we do let a few bloggers publish direct to the web &#8211; mostly in the media and technology team and they are revised and legalled. We might let a few more &#8211; as I said in Siobhain&#8217;s piece, I don&#8217;t think that even in a world of infinite resource you&#8217;d want to stamp out blogging direct to the web. </p>
<p>But it doesn&#8217;t work for everyone or every type of blog, so we have a range of approaches. The vast majority of web publication gets subbed/revised/furniture subbed etc etc. Some (such as live blogging) are more like broadcast commentary where you trust journalist&#8217;s expertise and experience to steer them away from too much trouble. </p>
<p>Personally I think this debate is valid and worth having &#8211; in lots of places I don&#8217;t think it&#8217;s even being considered. But to me there are good reasons to build subs into the digital world order, not strip them out.<br />
Linking, presenting, SEO and helping readers navigate content seem to me natural sub-editors&#8217; responsibilities and don&#8217;t seem to have got any less important or needed. I&#8217;d like to see subs seize the opportunity to redefine the role rather than defend the right to sub the small words of every blog post. </p>
<p>And we revise as we go along.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
