Pasadena Now publisher and editor James Macpherson justifies the move as a cost-saver that could significantly improve local reporting. "Whether you’re at a desk in Pasadena or a desk in Mumbai, you’re still just a phone call or e-mail away from the interview," he tells AP. One of the anony-bloggers behind Foothill Cities nails him on it:
That's true, to a certain degree. The type of journalistic coverage McPherson is talking about really could be done by someone in another country, largely because their "coverage" often consists of little more than glorified press releases and parroting of the local media.
To be sure, there's a lot of good work that can be done online. Lord knows the majority of our information comes to us online and we depend upon the web as invaluable research tool. But there are clear limits to using the internet to report on local news and politics.
At the least, it would be very difficult to understand the issues Pasadena faces, from a development perspective, without having your feet on the ground, without walking the streets of Pasadena.
Um, also, how much could Pasadena Now really be spending on journalists?