Guardian, #guardiantalk, legal costs, journalism and the Scott Trust

I have tried to check some facts with the Guardian but no response so far. Probably a blogger is not suited to the media enquiries scope.

My question is about the Guardian structure. Meg Pickard has stated that there is no connection between the closure of Guardian Talk and the purchase of Unlimited World. I can well believe there are disjointed bits for making various decisions. But at some level there is a policy made about priorities. Close down general stuff or local papers. Open up more in business to business. something like that. It would be interesting to know more about how this works.

From the website it appears that the Scott Trust has a concern for journalism. But journalism is changing. Citizen journalism for example is well worth considering I would think. Is there any official policy on this?

The Evening Standard has reported

It looks like an explanation has emerged for why The Guardian has abruptly closed its online Talkboards last month with little explanation after 10 years. The print version of the paper yesterday ran a prominent and very grovelling apology for publishing "a number of defamatory, untrue and abusive comments" on the readers' comments website. It is thought that The Guardian has reached a legal settlement with a private individual concerned. Unusually, those involved at The Guardian refused to comment.

So the sudden crisis theory may have some basis. But there is still the policy issue of what priority there is for talkboards and user generated content or whatever it is they like to call it. The statement that after a period of review they do not want to support a separate platform  makes sense also. Further explanation would still be welcome.

Meanwhile there is no reluctance to risk the legal costs of reporting on phone hacking etc. 

Quite right too, and well done on Wikileaks but the #guardiantalk story is in contrast. The "no comment" - (just go away) approach has so far been a great success. 

So I would welcome any information about the Guardian structure and how these decisions came about.

Also, another fact I tried to check. It seems to me that Jeff Jarvis is writing less for Media Guardian. Is this a budget cut as with Simon Caulkin from the Observer? Or is it the sort of thing he writes about? So far nothing on Buzzmachine about #Guardiantalk but always worth checking, you just have to apply the ideas to your own situation.