Not sure when they launched but the topic pages that Evening Edition added are inter­est­ing. Syria’s one exam­ple I dug up. They seek to answer three ques­tions: What’s hap­pen­ing? Why you should know about this? and What now?

At the bot­tom there’s then a list of related sto­ries sorted chrono­log­i­cally. Cool to see some real-world exper­i­men­ta­tion with explain­ers. It’s prob­a­bly a lot of edi­to­r­ial work to craft those sum­maries but the pay­off is worth it, I think.

My Gettysburg ora­tion: A vision for jour­nal­ism that can long endure:

But let’s be hon­est: Most of the con­tent we pub­lish isn’t sto­ries. It’s news. It’s facts. It’s infor­ma­tion. Let’s respect the pure, tra­di­tional story – the nar­ra­tive string of para­graphs – by reserv­ing that form for real sto­ries that have story ele­ments such as plot, char­ac­ter, set­ting and theme.

This whole speech is phenomenal.

We need to rein­vent the arti­cle. Sean Blanda illus­trates that it’s time to rethink not just the arti­cle but how infor­ma­tion is pub­lished on the web. I agree. My favorite nar­ra­tives are those that answer long, wind­ing ques­tions by telling a story. They are more akin to a short book than a news story. This recent New Yorker piece is 50 pages and over 20,000 words when I drop it in to I loved that arti­cle, but default­ing to the same men­tal model and design pre­sen­ta­tion for a few hun­dred word piece about NFL draft trades is ludicrous.