What were the key issues discussed at the roundtable?

Whether readers found the paper useful and accurate. Whether the paper reflected their concerns and the overall presentation of the paper. Whether we were missing any key stories.


Were some issues more important to readers, viewers, story subjects and sources? If so, what were they?

Most participants agreed that education was highly important. One participant asked that reporters be more skeptical in reporting what officials had to say. He also suggested more investigative coverage. In response, two students analyzed the campaign contributions of the Bronx delegation to the City Council.


Were there important points of agreement on coverage approaches or news philosophy that would improve the newspaper's content and its credibility? What were they?

There was agreement that we were do a good job reflecting the community and surprising them with news they didn't previously know. There was a plea to make the paper year-round. We currently only publish 12 issues in the spring. A few also suggested we add a community calendar.


Were there points on which roundtable participants agreed to disagree? Where were they?

Yes, whether we should print some articles in Spanish.


Will the newspaper consider changes in its coverage of the roundtable issue, or in its news philosophy, as a result of the discussions? What changes?

We added calendar listings in our final issue. In addition, we will publish an online version of the paper in the fall based on contributions from two reporting classes. I am also working on proposal to staff the paper year-round, possibly with interns. I'll also emphasize importance of following up on stories from year to year (since staff turns over annually).


How has the newspaper informed its readers of the roundtable, what happened there and what may occur because of the discussion?

I wrote an article for our last issue.


Contact information
Addie Rimmer: amr76@columbia.edu