The first-ever interactive 'Masthead' ... on paper, no less! This has to be a first.

Looking back over the previous seven issues of The Masthead that I have edited, I see a pretty clear theme emerging from many of them. It's all about change.

We're at it again here. In this issue, City University of New York professor Jeff Jarvis looses what must be the most furious bombardment of editorial-page doom I've read in a long while. The Somme River valley didn't take this much incoming in the summer of 1916.

Yes, Jarvis's judgment comes across as pretty bleak. But the responses from NCEW members--which, by the miracle of the Internet, are printed immediately following Jarvis's opinion piece--should provide some salve. Yes, the future is uncertain. No, it may not be the end of the world as we know it. Or even as journalism professor-slash-bloggers know it.

Jarvis's essay first appeared on his website, buzzmachine.com. That was not my choice. I had requested that Jarvis write a piece for The Masthead about his gloomy expectations for editorial pages. But I did not anticipate that he would first publish his essay on his own website.

Do I chafe at the thought of control-freak journalism professors setting the rules by which I direct this magazine? Oh, my, yes. But not so much so that I could ignore this remarkable opportunity.

NCEW members read Jarvis's essay on his website, and many of you responded in different forums, including our own listserv. As a result, this issue of The Masthead includes not only a controversial essay, but over a dozen NCEW-member responses. That's gotta be a first.

Two respected representatives of think tanks, meanwhile, agreed to present their views about the value of their institutions in a pair of feature pieces. Jim Weidman of the conservative Heritage Foundation gives us a well-written primer on the value of think tanks generally. And Dean Baker of the liberal Center for Economic and Policy Research addresses the selling points of his institution more specifically.

Given the reliance many of us place on think tanks when it comes to understanding complex policy issues, I thought it valuable for us to hear from the sources themselves about why they think their institutions provide value to editorialists.

We also have a variety of reports from the incredibly well-received Pittsburgh convention. I highly recommend them, especially the delightful "diaries" prepared by first-time attendees. Whoever would have guessed that disparate characters like David Barham and Robyn Blumner would emerge from their critique session as such buddies?

I should note here that this is my last issue as Masthead editor. I am turning this esteemed duty over to the superbly talented and capable Kate Riley of Seattle.

Now what the hell am I going to do in the wee morning hours?