Globeandmail.com did a live blog of the Osgoode subway shooting using Cover It Live.

The first post went up at 12:21 p.m. (approx. 1 hr 36 min. after the shooting) -- and linked to the site's breaking news story.

Editor Sasha Nagy did much of the blogging. He grabbed snippets off CP24 (a CTVglobemedia property) and a screencap photo from CTV (my employer) of the victim being wheeled on a gurney.

If this was meant to be a citizen journalism exercise, however, citizens didn't appear to contribute any hard information.

They mainly contributed questions and comments during the exchange.

Here's an example (that began seven minutes after the blog ran a G&M staff photo clearly showing some of the victim's face):

1:30
 [Comment From RJToronto]
I guess photos of the shooting victim may impinge on his privacy rights ... His family may not want to find out this way. Otherwise, I love the new liveblogging interface.

1:32
 Mathew Ingram (G&M communities editor - BD):  Thanks, RJToronto -- I agree that seeing a family member's face on the news might not be the best way to find out that kind of thing.   As far as privacy rights are concerned, the law makes an exception for photographs taken during a news event

This exchange made me smile:

1:43
 [Comment From Tom Toronto]
I appreciate the immediacy and availability of updates this forum brings, and after reflecting on it, I also appreciate the dialogue as opposed to traditional reporting. I think using cover it live to cover a shooting is just new to me, and initially seemed a bit shocking.

1:46
 Mathew Ingram:  Thanks for the comment, Tom -- it's new to us as well   :-)
1:50
 [Comment From Bora]
It’s amazing how this form of reporting brings that raw community feel. I feel informed and engaged. Great job!
1:50
 Mathew Ingram:  Thanks, Bora
 

I smile because I wonder if the 'Bora' above is my old colleague Bora Nikolic, who used to work for the Globe. Go ex-team! :)

While some may have felt informed and engaged, the live blog missed some stuff. It had audio of an early scrum by Supt. Hugh Ferguson, but didn't post audio or video of the 2 p.m. newser. It also didn't mention whether the breaking news story had been updated with the newser.

Note this from Ingram's Twitter feed (at 2-something p.m.):

the man picked up after the incident at Osgoode Station this morning is not responsible for the shooting, police say: http://bit.ly/lysP about 9 hours ago from TweetDeck

That never made it onto the live blog. Too many social media tools, not enough time?

They posted the photo of the suspect at 6:02 p.m. However, the police issued the news release with the photo at 4:57 p.m. Cover It Sort-Of Live.

The press release link didn't come for another 37 minutes. But the photo was attached to the press release, so why the lag?

At 6:41 p.m., the blog stated that Osgoode station was still open (at 4:39 p.m., the blog said it was still closed). But the TTC sent a My TTC alert at 5:25 p.m., and a news release at 5:12 p.m. said Osgoode had been re-opened.

I would idly note that by 6:41 p.m., the vast majority of downtown commuters would have dispersed.

So, while it would seem a few people liked the experiment (Ingram's words, not mine), the blog actually delivered slow and incomplete reportage.

In terms of delivering a U.S. Air Flight 1549 type of photo or other citizen content, it didn't do that either.

But I like the fact that Ingram took the time to explain why they were doing certain things.

However, if you have something like a transit-related story, wouldn't it have been useful to have G&M transit reporter Jeff Gray contribute to the conversation?

I look forward to globeandmail.com's own review.

Addendum

Social media maven Dave Fleet wrote the following on Friday morning (seen via Twitter):

My take: this is a great experiment. I tuned-in after a couple of hours, but found it very helpful to see real-time updates as developments broke and more information came to life.

One important point to remember: this coverage is after the fact; note that when this started they’d already updated their breaking news story. In my view, this is simply a different medium for reporting the news, albeit a very modern one.

Here's the last two tweets we exchanged:

davefleet @billdinTO I'm guessing we have similar views - good experiment... had bugs such as timeliness and holes in coverage, but a good sign? 21 minutes agofrom TweetDeckin reply to billdinTO

billdinTO @davefleet Yep. Experiments are good. My concern would be about spreading one's self too thin across platforms. 7 minutes ago from web in reply to davefleet

Addendum 2

Mathew Ingram offered some thoughts on Friday morning:

All in all, I think it was a worthwhile experiment, and from a number of responses I've seen on Twitter and on blogs, some others agree. Bill Doskoch, a blogger and staffer at CTV who used to work at globeandmail.com, had some thoughts about ways in which we fell short of our goal -- posting information late, incomplete details, and so on -- and those are all fair points I think. It was a spur-of-the-moment decision to do the live blog, and so we were playing catch-up for much of it, and making shotgun decisions on what to do and what not to do.

In terms of the big picture, I'm glad we're experimenting with things like this (and the Public Policy Wiki, which we launched last week), because I think it makes us more flexible and it reaches different readers in different -- and potentially interesting -- ways. Some people likely preferred to just read the updated news story about the shooting, which we had available in the traditional way and which was updated regularly with all the same audio and video. But I think there is something about the immediacy of a blog that appeals to a lot of people.

We got some criticism from a few people who felt a live-blog wasn't appropriate for such an event, but to me it isn't that different from any other reporting tool the media use already, such as an on-the-spot radio or TV interview or report. In any case, if anyone has any thoughts about either this live-blog or the topic in genera, I'd be happy to hear them -- my email is mingram@globeandmail.com or you can post a comment here.