Paul Carr starts his lengthy Guardian post with a rather cruel party analogy, but once you get past that, you get on to a much more interesting sense of his ideas for newspapers.

His advice: Stop updating and worrying about speed, start reflecting and worrying more about accuracy and quality. Embrace the bloggers and provide incentives for them to find you subscribers, then they'll stop swiping your content.

The approach: Get reporters to focus on producing quality and not 'vomiting words at a screen.'

The conventional wisdom --- or what stands for it in an unconventional and developing digital sphere --- was that full RSS feeds somehow keep people from eventually clicking to your site. Why do so when the full story is before you on a feed?
But the Guardian has opted for the full feed and is asserting the impact isn't harmful. The head of Guardian's development suggests, in fact, that the move will better engage users. It's a bold move and it'll likely prompt others to follow suit.

One of Roy Greenslade's more controversial columns has surfaced in the Guardian, in which he decries a fellow writer for seeing journalism through a commercial lens.
Greenslade asserts that journalism needs to see itself as free from its advertising dependence --- the chains of commerce, in effect --- and that new models will emerge that will be smaller but capable of sustaining journalism without the advertising. Professionals and amateurs alike will find funding, albeit in smaller amounts, in the future. He unfortunately doesn't elaborate on those models.
The comments on his column are those of relative consternation.

The Daily Telegraph of London is one of Britain's most respected dailies, but when its telegraph.co.uk Web site suddenly gained 6.3 million unique visitors in two months and overtook The Guardian Unlimited in popularity, even its most ardent believers had to wonder.
Media need accurate audience measurement online to attract and capture fledgling digital advertising. The challenge is acute for conventional media looking for a healthy bridge to the digital sphere.
At the moment there are varying sources of measurement, some of them real-time and some of them poll-related that deliver delayed information. The two systems offer variances in audience totals, but each has certain attributes that help media explain their reach.
In Britain, though, the spurt has set off alarm bells and prompted the joint industry committee for Internet standards to review the matter.
Out of this should come a clearer and consistent form of measurement to make sure everyone is comparing apples to apples.

When the BBC announced earlier that its international Web presence would begin to feature advertising, it stood to reason that its formidable foreign service would compete for --- and often win --- advertising at others' expense.
Emily Bell, the Guardian's digital leader, has surfaced to call the initiative an "enormous state-funded intervention into the international news advertising market."
This is no small statement.
BBC has roughly eight million unique visitors from outside the U.K., so its clout is significant in the digital space.

The British newspaper, The Guardian, is among the most sophisticated of all news media in the digital space, so any contemplation or decision on its part deserves attention.
The news organization is now evaluating how its journalists should participate in comment threads. This shouldn't surprise anyone --- once journalists were expected to blog, it was not unexpected they'd have to engage ---- but not many outlets are that far down the road. So the Guardian's deliberations on this front will be worth studying.
The Guardian will soon unveil a new Pluck-based platform to widen the interactivity between creators and audience, and there are still many questions from the newsroom's journalists on how plucky they can be in participating, how to use those threads for news, and largely how to ensure the venerable brand is preserved.