Warning: The following is "inside baseball" and will be of interest to only those few really interested in knowing what is going on inside our newsroom.

As you will recall, I've had two staff groups studying our processes, priorities and structure with an eye to yet another newsroom reorganization mandated by our downsizing late last year.

After receiving the report of the Content Study Group, I asked them to go back and return with some specific suggestions about subjects we should be covering, subjects we should drop and how our reporters, especially, could be allocated to cover it all.

They sent me their report late last week and it already has been the subject of a newsroom discussion.

But because I've posted the earlier reports on this blog, I felt I should share this addendum, as well.

I think the study group, both in the first report and in the addendum, did an enormous amount of work.

I thought they skirted some of the hardest questions in the addendum by suggesting that reporters take on more than one "beat" and that most reporters should also be able to do "general assignment," meaning whatever else needs to be covered at any given time.

Making reporters cover two, three or four beats is one way to spread a thin staff, but it still means that each topic will be covered with less intensity.

On the other hand, they did make some tough suggestions, particularly involving the editorial pages and newsroom managers.

So, all in all, there are many ideas here worth discussing.

Keep in mind, if you choose to read any of these reports, that the documents are not plans or blueprints. They are a collection of ideas that deserve further consideration.

Here's the link to the Content Study Group's addendum.

Here is the link to the original content report.

And, finally, here is the link to the Production Study Group's report.

I'm interested in hearing reaction from those who remain interested in this internal process.

Thanks,
steve