print culture and the Guardian

I have been encouraged by the discussion around Davos to put a question to alan Rusbridger, copied below.

Later this morning he wrote on a similar topic.

It turns up on a search for "add" and "ocd"

So please join this conversation with similar tags. Maybe this will work.

So far the Comment is Free discussion has not revealed anything specific about the Guardian.

------------------------------

My question is for Alan Rusbridger or anyone from the Guardian who cares to comment. When will the print version of the Guardian explain to the readers what the thinking is about an apparent strategy to transition to the web? At the We Media event last year in London, it was suggested that only some news organisations would make the transition. The Guardian policy seems to be to avoid any reference to this in print that might disturb the paying UK audience while leaking all kinds of rhetoric through Buzzmachine to build an online following for advertisers. The Media section often covers ABC figures on print circulation without any mention of the web activities of the same news organisations. This makes very little sense. There was discussion of including digital editions in the ABC numbers but not much has happened. Why is this?

Apparently the Davos discussion on Digital Futures is under "Chatham House rules" so the blogging public are not much the wiser. However, Richard Sambrook repeated something that may have come from somewhere...

...a neat way of differentiating journalists and bloggers. "Bloggers suffer from Obsessive Compulsive Disorder, journalists suffer from Attention Deficit Disorder." In other words, journalists report and move on and don't always follow up. Bloggers are obsessive, get hold of an issue and won't let go....

So these questions will come up again.

Meanwhile why not offer Jeff Jarvis a page on a Saturday somewhere near the main editorial to summarise what has previously been hidden away?