Response to the 2014 North Woods Call reader survey has been somewhat anemic. We take that to mean you are either satisfied, or too polite to complain.
Of the seven responses we received so far, comments have included “It’s great,” “now the Call is fair and balanced” and “I like the diversity and timeliness of natural resources-related news.”
One reader added that he appreciates our focus on the “ethical,” even if it isn’t popular. “This should be our highest calling,” he said. “More of us sportsmen need it. [John] Gunnell gets it.”
On the critical side, we were told that we don’t need so many editorials and columns on things not related to current natural resources-related news, especially from individuals other than the editor. “They’re nice to read now and then,” one person said, “but I’d rather have the space taken up with news we can use.”
Another respondent said that most of the news covered is about things he already knows. “How can you get ahead of issues and happenings?” he asked, while another individual suggested more information about “pending legislation” and what readers can do to help.
We suppose the answer to that last question lies in resources and staffing. When The Call has a greater abundance of both, there will naturally be more enterprise in our reporting and additional ability to get ahead of things that need to be covered.
Unfortunately, there is only so much a small mom-and-pop operation can do with a relatively small number of subscribers.
“I fully realize the value of a paper that focuses on conservation issues,” said one reader. “I wish more did the same.”
So do we.
We look forward to the day when The Call can grow beyond these current constraints and better serve the conservation community. In the meantime, we very much appreciate the enthusiasm and support we do have, as well as this input from readers.
No comments:
Post a Comment