Becoming old-fashioned: bringing readers inside the opinions: an editorial writer interviews himself.

Question: You publicize your editorial ideas ahead of time and then let readers comment on the rough-draft editorials. How? Why?

Answer: Yes, readers know the Statesman Journal editorial board's opinion long before reading the final version in print. Almost every weekday, we post a note on our editorial blog telling readers what editorial topics we're working on--for the next day and especially for the weekend. We give a synopsis of the concept, listing the lead writer so readers can e-mail him or her. Once the draft editorial is completed, we post it as well, inviting additional comments.

We're simply employing old-fashioned techniques: Chat with readers (via e-mail instead of at the corner bar), write editorials, and revise those editorials throughout the day. Instead of having multiple print editions, we have multiple online editions, culminating in one print edition.

Q: Whose idea was this?

A: Thanks goes to fellow NCEWers. We've borrowed ideas from colleagues around the country, putting them together--adding a few twists of our own--in a way that seems to work for us.

Q: In posting topics and drafts, don't you worry that readers will try to influence the editorials?

A: We hope so.

Readers have experiences, insights, and information that the editorial board might not have considered. Readers, as with editorial board members, also help us out by spotting glitches that have made it into a rough draft.

Q: What about public officials? Won't they try to sway what you say?

A: We should be hearing their side anyway. If they're savvy enough to read the Editorial Blog throughout the day and contribute their two cents' worth, more power to them.

If we're doing our job, we've already talked to them. But some officials like to complain, "We didn't know you were going to opine on this or we would have told you that ..." With our Editorial Blog, they no longer have that excuse. Our ideas and rough-draft editorials are right there.

Besides, we're big on openness from public officials. Shouldn't we set an example ourselves?

Q: Aren't editorials historically the institutional voice of the newspaper?

A: They still are. By getting more eyes on the editorials, we sharpen our thinking--and possibly eliminate factual errors before they hit print. That happened the other day, when an editorial had an incorrect enrollment figure for a college. An official perusing the Editorial Blog alerted us, and we corrected the figure.

As for pressure--if we don't have a sufficiently thick skin to handle last-minute lobbying, we don't belong in this business.

Q: What about other newspapers? Don't you worry about their editorialists scooping you?

A: Newspapers should worry that not enough people are reading them, not that too many people are. As a practical matter, have you ever heard a person thumbing through the newspaper stacks at 7-Eleven say, "I'm not going to buy ABC newspaper because it has the same editorial ideas as XYZ newspaper"?

We know that other editorialists check out our biog. If it influences their thinking, so be it. Besides, we already trade opinions on the NCEW listserv.

Q: How often do you change editorials because of readers' or officials' comments?

A: Occasionally. Usually it's when they point out that something is unclear or imprecise. Sometimes, as happened with Sunday editorials about downtown development and a new school superintendent, the editorials went through substantial rewrites during the week. Readers... if they were interested ... could follow the process of how those editorials developed.

Q: How much time does this take?

A: Posting is not too cumbersome because of our online-publishing software. Each post probably takes five minutes.

We're a two-person shop. Our goal is for each of us to post three items a day. That varies; often we post far more. The irony is that during election season--when conventional wisdom suggests the blog would be particularly popular--we have less time for posting because of all the hours spent in endorsement interviews and editorial board discussions.

Q. Does anyone read your blog?

A: Yes. The editorial blog is our most popular blog (more popular than the newsroom's beer blog). The advantage of online is that we can track the numbers. We know, for example, that lots of people are reading even though few leave comments. (Readers generally send e-mails directly to my colleague, opinion editor Barbara Curtin, or me.)

Q: Is it worth it?

A: Absolutely. We're still refining this. For example, initially we didn't post early versions of our endorsement editorials. Then we asked ourselves, "Why not?"

Public response has been good. The greatest benefit may be that this process has improved our editorials. By writing a synopsis for the Web, we force ourselves to focus our thoughts. Knowing that readers will see our early drafts, we're more aware of writing for the common person instead of officialdom.

EDITOR'S NOTE: This Q&A was based on a column Dick wrote for his readers about the editorial process.

Tips

* Just start. Don't be afraid to work out the details as you go along.

* Don't fall in love with the Internet, blogs, etc., as being new-fashioned toys. They're tools for doing our traditional craft even better and reaching a wider audience.

* Be short and conversational in your blogs (good advice for editorials, too).

* Don't let the blog run your life but be honest with readers. If an editorial idea changes, say so. If you forgot to post a topic or an editorial, say so. Readers appreciate that humanness.

* Don't be discouraged by the lack of reader comments online. Many readers lurk but leave no comments.

* Don't lose your editorial voice. If readers and/or officials have helpful ideas, capitalize on them. If not, don't.

Dick Hughes, a member of the NCEW board, is editorial page editor of the Statesman Journal in Salem, Oregon. E-mail dhughes@ salem.gannett.tom