The New York Times needs to do a better job of linking.
I said that here in two posts on Nov. 24. Big deal, I rail about linking all the time, and Society of Professional Journalists and Poynter, among others, have blown me off.
But now the Times’ Standards Editor and Editor for News Presentation are telling Times staffers they need to do a better job of linking. Now, that’s a big deal.
In his After Deadline blog of “newsroom notes on usage and style,” Standards Editor Philip B. Corbett laments, “For all our progress in digital journalism, we sometimes still neglect one of its most basic tools: the link.”
Links should be “as routine in our stories as quotes,” Corbett wrote. After quoting from the Times Stylebook, which encourages linking “as a convenience” (more on that later), Corbett published a list of eight passages collected by Editor for News Presentation Patrick LaForge from recent Times stories that needed links (several needed multiple links).
I am pumping my fist and applauding here in my office.
And lest you think this is unrelated to my posts faulting the Times for its inconsistent linking, note that Patrick’s first example comes right from my second post on the 24th, which mentioned him and which we corresponded about (no attribution needed; I’d rather have it coming from him). Update: The Times post now links to mine.
I’m delighted to see this progress. I’d like to see the Times (and the industry) embrace linking as a matter of ethics, not just style. But style is progress. Patrick’s examples were excellent. I hope the Times follows his lead. And I hope the news business follows, too.
Links provide attribution, transparency, context and depth, all important qualities of good journalism. Let’s make them as routine in stories and checking our facts.
Update: I’m not the only one urging the Times to link better. A Contextly tweet called my attention to this excellent post urging better linking at the Times. Among my favorite lines:
(After praise for the Times’ acclaimed Snow Fall story): The story remains a dead-end.
Not for online storytelling. Some publications have been working on similar things independently, and many that weren’t are quickly learning to add many of the tricks to their storytelling reportoire.
It’s a dead-end for a simpler reason.
The 15,000 word epic has zero links. No links to other Times stories. No links to anything outside of the New York Times. …
I’m concerned that publishers seem to be thinking that marquee stories are too good to be sullied by links. …
Don’t discard links to construct self-contained monuments. Instead, make gorgeous portals.
Excellent piece. Read it.
[…] Read Steve Buttry, stevebuttry.wordpress.com […]
LikeLike
[…] post about links being a matter of ethics, not just convenience (just over 300); and a later post applauding Patrick LaForge for exhorting his Times colleagues to make better use of links (not even […]
LikeLike
[…] was “one reader” in a New York Times blog post (but was really pleased that the Times, after my urging, is calling for better linking by staff members). It is accurate. I […]
LikeLike
[…] called on it to a better job of linking, and got a bit of response, not from Baquet, but from Standards Editor Phil Corbett and Editor for News Presentation Patrick LaForge, who urged Times staf…. So I’m trying […]
LikeLike
[…] to my surprise, LaForge and Philip B. Corbett, the Times’ Standards Editor, sided with me and called for use of relevant links in stories. They treated it as a matter of style, rather than ethics, but I applauded it as […]
LikeLike
[…] New York Times exhorts staff to link more and better in stories […]
LikeLike
[…] Editor Margaret Sullivan said she passed the matter on to Standards Editor Phil Corbett, who supervises the Times corrections process. As public editor, Sullivan generally confines her […]
LikeLike
[…] November (twice) for its weak and inconsistent use of links for attribution and context. But I also praised the Times (including Corbett) in December for calling on its staff to provide more […]
LikeLike