Post-mortems of print issues

We are going to be public about what has gone well and poorly with each issue. In a perfect world we’d have someone else do a harsh critique of each issue.  Sadly that rarely happens, so we are left to do the best we can, with our blinkers and blindspots and egos in the way… For each paper issue,

What went well? (both for process and product)
What didn’t go well?
What would we have done differently if we’d known…
Therefore, what action are we going to take now?

Issue #7, July 2012
What went well? (both for process and product)
It looks good! It came out on time. Not many typos.
What didn’t go well?
Front page lacks proper picture
Not much “news” of local activity
Calendar not comprehensive, we think.
Mostly articles by Marc and Arwa
What would we have done differently if we’d known…
Got more news from people
Selected a decent image
Therefore, what action are we going to take now?
Add “what are our front page image options” to the standard meeting agenda. Liaise with Marc Roberts about panels at short-notice.
Send out email to various organisations one or two weeks before the publication date, asking for their past and future news. Set googlecalendar for this to prompt self!

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s