[Esip-preserve] potential NYT editorial on data

[Natalie Meyers]

another option might be publication in "The Conversation"?

https://theconversation.com/us

Natalie

On Fri, Apr 28, 2017 at 5:34 PM, Matthew Mayernik via Esip-preserve <
esip-preserve at lists.esipfed.org> wrote:

> Thanks all. I did submit the article this afternoon. The submitted doc is
> attached for your reference. I added a basic preliminary title, but the NYT
> op-ed guidance says that NYT will choose the title, so that's not
> important. They sent me an auto-response that said that we should know
> within 3 business days, and that if we don't hear by then, we can assume
> they don't want it and submit elsewhere.
>
> Thanks again for all of your input,
> Best,
> Matt
>
> On Fri, Apr 28, 2017 at 2:54 PM, Parsons, Mark <parsom3 at rpi.edu> wrote:
>
>> Well done, sir. You demonstrated exemplary inclusivity, leadership, and
>> compelling writing.
>>
>> fingers crossed.
>>
>> -m.
>>
>> On Apr 28, 2017, at 19:34, Matthew Mayernik via Esip-preserve <
>> esip-preserve at lists.esipfed.org> wrote:
>>
>> Hi all,
>> Thanks for all of your input. I've gone through your comments and edits
>> and have a much improved draft. As I mentioned, I think timeliness is more
>> important than the exact wording at this point, so I'd like to call it good
>> enough, and ready to submit. I'll try to get it in today, not soon enough
>> for this weekend, but potentially for next week if they like it.
>>
>> Also, I've had a few side conversations about authorship. I don't know
>> NYT policies on authorship, but if they accept, I will work with them to
>> find some way to indicate the group authorship, either in the by-line or as
>> an added sentence somewhere.
>>
>> Matt
>>
>> On Thu, Apr 27, 2017 at 10:51 AM, Matthew Mayernik <mayernik at ucar.edu>
>> wrote:
>>
>>> Hi all,
>>> I've put together a potential submission to the New York Times as a
>>> follow-on to our data rescue document. Mark Parsons and Ruth Duerr provided
>>> a very helpful first edit.
>>>
>>> Given that the chances of being accepted are very slim, and largely
>>> hinge on the timeliness of the topic, at this point I'd ask that you focus
>>> any feedback on 1) factual corrections, and/or 2) key calls to action, e.g.
>>> what would we hopefully want people to do as a result of reading the
>>> article. If it is accepted, the NYT would have major input in the final
>>> column, so wordsmithing at this stage isn't necessary. For these reasons, I
>>> made the doc comment-only.
>>>
>>> Please do send any objections, however, to the idea of doing a NYT
>>> editorial in the first place.
>>>
>>> https://docs.google.com/document/d/1SGJnqaSqOK8UGsTATAicyTH_
>>> W5rmBW6lSSZ8vLvN4iA/edit?usp=sharing
>>>
>>> Best,
>>> Matt
>>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Esip-preserve mailing list
>> Esip-preserve at lists.esipfed.org
>> http://lists.deltaforce.net/mailman/listinfo/esip-preserve
>>
>>
>>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Esip-preserve mailing list
> Esip-preserve at lists.esipfed.org
> http://lists.deltaforce.net/mailman/listinfo/esip-preserve
>
>


-- 
*Natalie K. Meyers*
*E-Research Librarian*


*University of Notre Dame*
1136A Hesburgh Library
Notre Dame, IN 46556
*o:* 574-631-1546
*f:* 574-631-6772
*e: *natalie.meyers at nd.edu

<http://library.nd.edu/>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.deltaforce.net/pipermail/esip-preserve/attachments/20170505/fb427c99/attachment-0001.html>