Comments on: Interactive graphic: Wealth calculator

By: Mindy McAdams

Mindy McAdams — Wed, 13 Jun 2007 01:22:30 +0000

Tom Jackson AND Matt Notowidigdo, who appears to be at MIT …

By: Joe Weiss

Joe Weiss — Tue, 12 Jun 2007 23:49:11 +0000

I’m pretty sure that the The New York Times’s wealth calculator was designed, programmed and implemented by Tom Jackson.

So in this case most of the team was in Tom’s head.

By: Derek

Derek — Tue, 12 Jun 2007 20:12:17 +0000

Whatever you call it, programming is programming. I may not be a good programmer, but I do write some code. I’m not sure why it’s such a bad word, or any worse than any other title. I think we too often get hung up on stuff like that.

Hiring a programmer for an online news operation isn’t much different than hiring anybody else – we just don’t have a lot of experience in it, so there are bound to be times when it seems like a scary or weird enterprise.

Funny thing: most of the best investigative reporters I know often could be described as “having their heads down in the bits.” Seems to work pretty well for them.

By: Mindy McAdams

Mindy McAdams — Tue, 12 Jun 2007 17:33:33 +0000

Fair enough about the quotation marks, Derek! (Grin!) I just feel a little frustrated by the way everyone is using that word, “programmer,” because it can be used to refer to a person who has his head down in the bits, you know, and THAT is not a solution to many of the puzzles of online journalism. Plus there are people such as Joe Weiss (Soundslides), who write a lot of code, but is it accurate to call him a programmer?

Put it another way: If I say I want to hire a programmer, will I get Joe Weiss?

By: DigiDave

DigiDave — Tue, 12 Jun 2007 11:57:55 +0000

I couldn’t agree more re: the utter importance of visual design/information architecture.

My old boss would say: If you don’t have a solution, give it to the designer.

Nine times out of ten — an editorial problem is really a design solution waiting to happen. And no matter how good a programmer is — if the design, user interface, etc sucks — well, so does the whole package.

By: Derek

Derek — Tue, 12 Jun 2007 05:47:30 +0000

True, few people have all three pieces, and you’ll get no argument from me on the need for first-rate graphic artists. But those making the argument for having more programmers involved in journalism aren’t doing so at the expense of graphic artists or anyone else; we’re saying they have become as necessary for certain tasks and should only be even more crucial in the future.

It’s entirely possible to imagine your post with some of the job titles reversed (or even without quote marks)!

By: Mindy McAdams

Mindy McAdams — Mon, 11 Jun 2007 22:56:51 +0000

Sorry if that sounded like a blanket statement, Derek — there are journalists who are also programmers (and vice versa) who fit both pieces together beautifully.

Few people, though, have all three pieces.

And then, there’s also the need to get people to work together effectively. If my super journalist-database wizard is not adept at visual/graphics, then I hope s/he can communicate with someone who is.

By: Derek

Derek — Mon, 11 Jun 2007 21:01:08 +0000

While I agree that programmers are not the solution to everything, I think you’re missing the point of those of us who have learned some programming. Some of us *do* know how to get population data or other types of data. Programming is simply another tool in the toolbox, and labeling “programmers” as if they could never have anything to do with an editorial process is both short-sighted and avoiding what is actually happening at news organizations, particularly those with CAR folks.