Celestial convergence

After reading Eric Celeste's Observer piece on the mess at the DMN, I initially thought I was in an unusual and untoward position of disagreeing with him re: convergence being an inherently bad thing.

His followup blog post clarifies and shows that I was missing the trees for the forest:

...I honestly think the best thing that the publisher and editor of the DMN can say to its demoralized staff is, "Don't ever think about marketing, penetration, circulation, convergence, or the company's financial peformance again. That is our job, and it's why we're paid a lot more than you are paid. Just kick the ever-loving shit out of Channel 8, the Dallas Observer, the Star-Telegram, every competitor you have. Write stories that make you proud. We'll take care of the rest."

I'm totally *NSync with that: Convergence is the future (present?), but you're going to muck it up if you make the reporters worry about it. Like we said: write for the most dynamic edition, and let editors and businessfolk worry about packaging and distribution.