The Observer team would like to thank those readers who took the time to respond to the survey that was published over the last few editions. The survey’s goals were to assess if we are living up to our mission as an organization and how we can improve. Your feedback was appreciated and very valuable.
A bi-partisan subcommittee of the Observer Board of Directors met to review all the responses. We received twenty-one total responses, as of February 11. Due to our publishing deadline, responses that came in after February 11, if any, are not included in our analysis.
The first question was, “Is the Observer living up to our Mission and Organization?” As a reminder, our mission is to build a sense of community throughout Suffield and provide a forum where all sides of an issue may be addressed. The Observer is an independent, non-profit, non-partisan organization seeking to provide information and news about the town of Suffield. 57% of respondents said yes, the Observer is living up to its mission, and 43% thought we were falling short. Respondents didn’t think we were non-partisan and that we didn’t represent all sides of an issue fairly. The criticisms largely revolved around the article by the former Library Director that appeared in the October issue, when time did not allow us to provide our First Selectman with an opportunity to respond. That criticism is entirely understandable.
The second survey question was, “How can the Observer improve?” Only 29% of respondents provided feedback. Suggestions included more coverage of local events and businesses, being more balanced, and that the paper leans more left politically and needs to have more diverse viewpoints.
To see all survey results in their entirety, please visit bit.ly/3OHjJns or scan the QR code with your phone.
As a direct result of this survey, the Observer Board met in early February and approved a new policy related to any editorial/column critical of a public official or public body. Under this new policy (added to page 28), such submittals would need to be received by the 12th of the month so the criticized individual or public body can respond in the same issue of the paper.