Is there a way to get a pdf of the entire paper?

Nicole,

Don't see any way to get a pdf, but if you go here you can buy a print version.

I have an idea: Let's start corporate sponsorship of front pages.

"This front page brought to you by (insert company)."

And we can have CEOs from these companies act as guest editors and decide content for the front page.

This is a new low for journalism.

I respectfully disagree, Josh. This outsider-editing-an-issue approach is not unprecedented in the magazine world (off the top of my head, Wired has done this before) and this does nothing if not get your attention.

It may not be terribly objective to put someone famous in as guest editor, but really, I don't see the harm in trying a new approach and getting in a different perspective of news judgment.

I'm with Ernie. I brought this up at my paper's budget meeting and a couple people had the same views as Josh - it's not right to let someone "sponsor" the paper.

Our city editor brought up this point: don't we as "objective" journalists do that everyday? We pick what we think is most relevant to readers and we all have our own biases. What makes us so terribly different than Bono? Our journalistic morals?

In this case, it goes way beyond a corporate sponsorship.A charitable organization gets half the profits AND it was dedicated to a HUGE issue - the global fight against AIDS. I wish American papers could loosen up and go beyond their treasured tradition news front and give readers a surprise sometime. This paper sold out in a few hours from what I read.

What makes us different from Bono is that we are SUPPOSED to be journalists. If what you're saying is that any dilettante can step into our shoes, then let's all go on tour with U2. I'm sure audiences would love to hear me sing instead of Bono.

And as for the papers they sold, is that what's most important to you as a journalist? It's not what I think should motivate us in our jobs. Sold out? They sure did.

I'm not sure I would characterize Bono as "any dilettante." He may not have been trained as a journalist but I'll bet that, given his position and access, his experience and breadth of understanding about some issues are wider than the average journalist's are. I also seem to remember reading that he was once an art student who was considered a rather good painter. I suppose that gives him at least some degree of critical eye. I don't think his being guest editor was such a bad idea.

I'm a journalist - I'm not trying to say that just ANY person can do our job and do it well... I'm just saying that you have to think about things in perspective. Anyone can go to journalism school and eventually get their two cents into a newspaper. As a regular reader, I'd be interested in Bono's views, probably more than 90% of the people's views at my paper. What's the harm in giving readers what they want? That's my point about newspapers selling out within a few hours.

It's not all about sales, but if you don't have content that people want to consume (i.e. BUY if you're talking about newspapers), what good is putting out the paper at all?

I'm not saying papers should do this every day, or every year - I just think that it's not such a horrible thing to have a surprise once in a while. It was a charitable act and I think that there's no harm done - I bet no readers thought "Oh boy, the Independent sure did cross the line by letting someone other than a room full of 'objective' journalists pick the day's stories."

No matter what side you end up on regarding this debate, I think both sides have good points. I respect Randy's viewpoint in particular, knowing that I'd probably make a pretty terrible replacement for Bono on stage, but at the same time, isn't this what the whole blogging revolution is all about -- giving unvarnished and untraditional voices their due?

Obviously, this school of thought has taken hold to a degree due to the ever-increasing popularity of self-publishing, so I think it's only fair that we find ways to work it into our own medium.

The idea of Bono guest-editing an issue, it's not what we'd do a decade ago, but you'd be missing the boat pretty considerably if you didn't admit the value of breaking free of some of the more traditionalist shakles of news judgment.

I'm not saying that we should let Bono edit an issue every day, but it's so easy to miss diverse voices in the newspaper that we shouldn't be afraid to take similar ideas and bring them to our own publications.

My, my... where to begin.

I don't think Bono having a deep understanding of a couple of issues (and by the way, he is the classic dilettante) qualifies him to edit a paper.

And what does being a former art student have to do with being a journalist?

If readers are interested in Bono's views, let him write a guest column. But to be guest EDITOR? His agenda is well-known; that kind of person shouldn't be editing even for a day.

As for whether or not readers care, not everyone understands the ramifications of a seemingly innocuous event. Lots of people didn't care if Judith Miller or Matt Cooper spilled the beans on who their source was in the Plame coverage. Our readers can't always serve as our conscience; sometimes journalists are in a better position to determine what's right and what's wrong for our profession.

Finally, yes, this is a reflection of what blogs are all about. But that's what is supposed to distinguish us from the blogosphere. We are supposed to be better than that.

We shouldn't pretend to be above the fray of the blogosphere. I think it's too easy for us to say, as newspaper people, that blogs represent a form of lower content. And that's the point I'm getting at here -- blogs aren't lower content (besides all the libel and slander and such, which traditional news judgment can help control) and we should stop treating our publications like fine dining and blogs like bar food. They each have different strengths and we need to find ways to make them work together.

It doesn't matter how qualified Bono is at editing a newspaper. The fact that he can be considered an "expert" who brings in different perspectives is enough to qualify him for the job. At the least, it gives the paper a voice and personality that says more than a regular front page might say.

The traditionalist arguments for news judgment over new types of judgment, the lack of trust of the individual over the big media bone machine -- this is why we're not reaching younger readers. We're so concerned about being newspapers of record that we run from risk like it's the bird flu.

Randy, reread what I said. What I said is that Bono is not "any" dilettante as you had stated in your last post. Okay, perhaps he is a dabbler, but I was pointing out that his position and experiences afforded him some unique experiences. Your decription takes quite a few liberties.

"I don't think Bono having a deep understanding of a couple of issues..."

What is your understanding of his intellect and abilities? I would imagine his life has been pretty rich with more than "a couple" opportunities for some deep understanding of issues. Here's a guy who travels the world and meets with experts and heads of state about, at least, the issue of AIDS. It would be my guess that he probably knows more about it than either you or I. That being said, I am not a Bono appologist or even a great fan, though I have met him a couple of times early in his musical career.

Secondly, what I said in reference to his being a painter was

"I suppose that gives him at least some degree of critical eye."

I never called him a journalist, nor an editor for that matter. Though, in a practical sense, what I have learned over many years in both the fine and applied arts, is that many creative diciplines overlap. In fact a creative mind is a creative mind, and creative minds move in and out of creative diciplines all the time. I'm sure that there are many on this site who can identify with that statement. Would you generally consider an editor a creative? I don't know. But I'm not sure what magical abilities J-school endows anyone with. Usually it's that persons experiences beyond J-school that makes them a good or bad editor.

Tomorrow's Sun-Sentinel will be guest edited by Toby Keith. Discuss.

Nicole, I'm afraid he's going to put a boot up your reader's collective ass. :D

OK, so would we frown if say a Christian religious expert was called in to "edit" a huge spread on evolution, same-sex marriage or maybe the controversial Da Vinci Code? Maybe let Falwell or Dobson be that guest editor.

Maybe when we report on certain issues, we should send copies of our stories back to these "experts" and allow them to proofread first before we publish them?

Perhaps we should not have journalists at all. If diversity for the sake of diversity is the end-all and we need to break this traditional mold, then make newspapers truly a community endeavor: throw open the doors; allow anyone to edit, report, shoot photos, etc.

After all, there are voices that must be heard, and this is their only outlet. Remove objectivity. It has no place in a new medium.

Just a thought.

"If diversity for the sake of diversity is the end-all and we need to break this traditional mold, then make newspapers truly a community endeavor: throw open the doors; allow anyone to edit, report, shoot photos, etc."

We already do this to a degree not so far up the road from you. We run submitted photos from readers daily in our "Beauty Spot" feature, sports stories from parents, and columnists who are real people in the community and quote-unquote experts. But we leave the editor hat on. Which is exactly what we should be doing and where the control should be.

And you know what? I'd say that we get a more complete view of the community from being unafraid of making the dialogue work in both directions.

I wasn't suggesting we open the doors that wide, anyway. All I'm saying is that we should look at instances like this less as Chicken Little sky-is-falling situations and more as the adventurous chances they are.

I have no clue where I suggested (as you hint at in your post) that we all of a sudden stop being journalists and let people review our content. I've been suggesting moderation and intelligent risk in every single post I've made. And that's completely compatible with good journalism, as far as I'm concerned.

I admit it, I'm pretty bullish on interactivity and direct communication with readers, as well as the idea of trying different approaches such as letting Bono edit once every couple of years. But that's because I see where we're headed as a field.

OK, let's take a deep breath here.

Does anyone, perhaps anyone involved in the daily production of the Independent, have any idea of the scope of Bono's actual involvement other than his photo on the front? Because that's all I can see from here.

I've read magazines, mostly women's ones, that have been "guest edited" before. They were no different from the normal publication other than a column, maybe a special feature or two.

Did Bono nix stories he didn't like? Did he direct coverages of topics important to him? (This would mean he was involved for more than one day, to assign advance stories.) Did he tell the artist how to draw the cover? Did he tell editorial writers what to write?

Or did he just put his very recognizable face on an issue of a paper painted the same color as an issue very dear to him? There's no concrete definition for "guest edited." My guess, and it's only a guess because I have no inside knowledge, is that he suggested a story or two, maybe wrote a column, and possibly helped to brainstorm the cover. He didn't "take over" the paper, or end journalism as we know it, or make any of the thousands of decisions you and I, or our superiors, make every day.

I think he did more than a "dilettante" would, but far less than the average journo does in a day. Not that we practice a sacred, secret craft that no one else can do. But I don't think he's quitting the rock business any time soon. (A pity, in my opinion.)

I've read magazines, mostly women's ones, that have been "guest edited" before. They were no different from the normal publication other than a column, maybe a special feature or two.

Magazines and trade publications are different beasts entirely.

I suspect you are right Denise. That Bono is leanding his name and face to an issue largely done by the regular staff.

has anyone mentioned that bono is a tool?

I have to agree with Denise. All we've seen is Bono's face on the cover. And for all we know, that's all he did, leant his face to help sell more issues to get more money for the AIDS fight.

How is a magazine guest editor so much different from what may have happened here (Bono taking a photo and writing a column)?

My paper sells special editions to raise money around the holidays to get presents for needy children. We design a special wrap for those editions. Is that horrible too?