DAVID ARKIN

For a few years now, there's been this slowly building trend of media organizations sharing what they'll be covering online that day.

Some magazines, like Time, have featured the content on a page in the front of their magazine, promoting the chats and such that they will have each day of the week. Others, like the example here, of Rotoworld, a fantasy sports website, sort of does the same thing, but they're an online-only product.

Actually, GateHouse Media's Observer Dispatch does this well. They feature short snips of what they're covering online on their Page 2. It usually tees up something that the paper will be covering live, along with the online platform they will use.

It clearly does take some planning to make this work, but is it worth it? Do you get a return? Yes and yes. While online readers don't have the same patterns as print readers in terms of going to your website at 11 a.m. on Thursday because they know they're going to get to read their favorite local column, the way print readers are accustomed to seeing the same content on the same day, pushing online readers to your website at specific times for certain features, is just smart.

Why should readers "like" you on Facebook? I'm sure editors have many good reasons. 1) Quality content. 2) Opportunities to share content. 3) Voting on polls. 4) Great galleries and videos. Those things are likely all true, but how does a single reader know that you have any of those things?

A newspaper in Texas is placing reporters' Twitter handles underneath bylines in an effort to drive more eyeballs and engagement to the social media site. It's an interesting idea and I see some real value in the move.

For years, newspapers have been moving away from the words "staff reporter" under a reporter's byline, replaced with the reporter's email address.

There's been no bigger industry story this Fall than the fallout between Jim Romenesko and the Poynter Institute.

Over the weekend, Romenesko offered a 3,000-word explanation of the soap opera, days after he officially resigned. I don't really care much about the he said/she said here, but there are a few watercooler topics to come out of the mess.

Poynter is known for its tough standards on ethics, so in a way, it wasn't surprising and honestly, nice to see the organization hold the line.

On the other hand, most journalists were shocked and eyes rolled over Poynter pushing Romenesko out the door for his lack of attribution, something that's been going on for a years.

Media companies are quickly learning that effective Facebook posting takes more than just throwing a link into a status update.

On Friday, I wrote about how some media companies are starting to use a fill-in-the-blank approach on Facebook. And others, for a while, have been using questions and polls, as another way of engaging folks on Facebook.

The New York Times uses quotations quite effectively on Facebook.