Editors' blog - the first year
The Editors' blog is one year old. We didn't exactly have a birthday party but the other day a few of us got together to toast it with mineral water and try to assess the success or otherwise of the venture. The verdict was that despite the fears of some that a new openness would lead to embarrassing disclosures and uncomfortable headlines, by and large these haven't been realised and the experiment has been judged at least worthwhile.
A few of the memorable moments for us: the discussion over claims that the BBC had banned Fiona Bruce from wearing a cross on air (actually it hadn't); ongoing debates about conspiracy theories, bias, balance, hype, 'dumbing down', covering difficult news for children, and, yes, even when things haven't gone right.
It's also given us a chance to show some of the drama behind the scenes, (such as when we were hit by an injunction); and of course the massive support readers have shown for our colleague Alan Johnston.
But you won't be surprised to hear that not everyone at the BBC is impressed. I noticed - on a blog as it happens - that Kate Adie reportedly objects to BBC managers who blog during working hours. "Their weblogs, she maintains, are proof they have nothing better to do." Nothing better to do than talk to and listen to their audience?
On the other hand, some external observers think that much of the BBC's contribution to blogging is still far too gentle and uptight. This week I met Joe Trippi, the American political guru who's credited with reinventing political campaigning through use of the internet. He thinks we editors should be blogging after every show, discussing with viewers the successes and shortcomings. At least in Newsnight's case this wouldn't be on company time.
It would be good to know if you're with Kate or Joe, what you'd like more or less of, and how the editors' blog might develop in its second year.