We've taken our first steps toward the "Newsroom of the Future."

At 6 a.m. on Jan. 29 we launched our Breaking News initiative and it was a success - not necessarily because we reported important news (our first post was a weather alert at 6:05 a.m.), but because we signaled a change in direction for the newsroom. The Spokesman-Review is no longer a newspaper, but an information company that publishes news and information whenever and however people want it.

Although we've been publishing stories on our Web site for several years, this initiative is noteworthy because we are intentionally reporting and editing news for spokesmanreview.com - as opposed to posting stories online that were originally conceived and written for the newspaper.

As part of this initiative (first detailed in the "Newsroom of the Future" report), we've devoted a reporter and editor to the Web site full time, starting at 6 a.m. every week day - a full three hours earlier than we previously started most of our shifts.

The bulk of our 'breaking news coverage' will come between the hours of 6 a.m. and noon when our online audience is at its peak, although we will continue to post stories on the site throughout the day and evening as they occur.

Eventually, we hope to add a second breaking new reporter to cover the afternoon and early-evening news cycle, and then expand into weekend coverage.

Breaking News Reporter Amy Cannata's first day went like this: she posted a 'drive-time' weather alert at 6:05 a.m., followed by a traffic update at 6:15 a.m. At 6:30 a.m., the police department's public information officer called her about an alleged assault. At 6:45 a.m., Amy headed out to the scene and for the next hour or so called in additional details to Nancy Malone, our newly named Assistant City Editor for Multimedia. Amy wrapped up coverage of that event by taking a photo with her cell phone, which we later posted on our site.

By the middle of last week, we not only were reporting breaking news, we were beating TV at their own game: we had a story about a man who was hit by a train up on our Web site before any of the local stations had anything on their morning news programs.

I suspect after another month or so of training, Amy will be able to function as a truly Mobile Reporter or "MoJo" - able to report stories and shoot and edit video from the field, without ever having to come into the office.

And what's the value of all that high-tech wizardry? Immediacy. In this era of 24/7 news and information, the newspaper's future rests on its ability to tell people what they want to know whenever they want to know it - via the Web and newspaper, via e-mail and cell phone alerts, perhaps one day via a Web-based broadcast out of our newsroom.

The goal of editors will be to improve the quality of online journalism while not diminishing our award-winning print journalism. Newspapers across the country are seeking to strike the same balance.

In fact, last week Seattle Times Executive Editor David Boardman announced a restructuring of newsroom leadership and coverage there to better integrate print and online. He apparently referred to the changes as the "path to transformation."

Here in Spokane, we'll work to make sure our print journalism contains all its customary context, analysis and expertise, while our online journalism provides immediate information that is regularly refreshed.

Citizens and news-watchers should be well-served by this initiative. Let us know how you think we're doing.

Carla wrote:

The goal of editors will be to improve the quality of online journalism while not diminishing our award-winning print journalism. Newspapers across the country are seeking to strike the same balance.

In fact, last week Seattle Times Executive Editor David Boardman announced a restructuring of newsroom leadership and coverage there to better integrate print and online. He apparently referred to the changes as the "path to transformation."

Here in Spokane, we'll work to make sure our print journalism contains all its customary context, analysis and expertise, while our online journalism provides immediate information that is regularly refreshed.

Citizens and news-watchers should be well-served by this initiative. Let us know how you think we're doing.

My response:

As you continue to make this transition to online content, in particular as you increase the resources for the online newsroom, despite what some have said elsewhere, you have my full support for a remarkable number of reasons.

Having extensively read (and enjoying every detail) of your travels in search of the newsroom of the future, and having read several interesting and illuminating comments written by other editors, I fully recognize the news room of the future is not, by any means, a polished, finished work, but a work-in-progress. David Boardman was right: this is a transformation, which implies we are changing. Sometimes I wax reminiscent, looking back over time, remembering when the SR was clearly a follower, rather than a leader. Given some of the numbers that Steve Smith has posted about the online news room in the past, am I safe in saying that the SR has become one of the leaders in the growing industry of online news?

One the places I nearly always look, and perhaps it is even a bit unfair, is a direct head-to-head comparison of the news available to me online from the SR directly compared to the TV news web pages online. My personal opinion is that, for whatever reasons, the writers of the news on the local TV station's web sites simply do not have the professional acumen I demand from professional journalists, while, for the most part, the writers of the SR are more meticulous about their craft. Perhaps it is somewhat elitist of me to say this, but the TV stations seem to repetitively "sell" TV personalities more than they sell punchy well-written news. I do not like it. If I want details about any given news story, and not hyperbole, I can find it on the SR online.

Another point is who is held accountable for the news we read? The SR has a column that runs every day containing omissions, errors and gaffes that have taken place in previous editions, both online and off. Do I ever see this on TV web sites? Never. To date, if one were to write a critical and thoughtful public letter to the SR online, it probably would receive fair and open treatment. I can honestly say there is nothing comparable to that available from ANY of the local TV stations. Although my intentions are honorable and forthright, I can name dates and times I have bitterly complained about inaccuracy in the news on the TV stations, and silence is all I ever have received. On the SR web site, particularly News is a Conversation, if I complain, I need to have my facts straight, because the author(s) will respond. That is a form of accountability I respect, and demonstrates a responsibility to the readers hitherto unseen in print journalism in the past.

Along that same line, when I have the disposable time to do so, I exhaustively check the facts surrounding local news stories, particularly about the malaise in City Hall. I do not always agree with what the SR has written, but at least they present the facts to me; the TV news web sites give me summations, and sometimes not even that.

So, to summarize, Carla, I think you are doing a GREAT job of transformation.

Some people, who have not been so deeply involved and entrenched in this process of change do not understand fully where we started or where we are going. However, from my place in the online armchair, it has been compelling and exciting to watch.