A plan to reduce the number of courts in Malaga from 11 to six has been criticised by the five towns set to lose out.
Court short
by 
James Bryce
James Bryce 
8 Comments
Leave a Reply
You must be logged in to post a comment.
This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.
Much as I value the OP, it has a very annoying habit of publishing extremely short “stories” like this.
Would it really have strained your journalistic resources that much to write a more complete and interesting report?
The very least you could do is name the towns losing their courts…
Lazy? Definitely.
Hi Christopher,
Generally our ‘news in brief’ section is for stories we feel are of interest to our readers but aren’t worth more than a summary. This particular story was edited down due to space constraints in the print edition, but we agree it warranted more explanation and should have included the names of the courts.
To clarify, the courts under threat are Archidona, Coin, Estepona, Ronda and Torrox. This would leave courts in Antequera, Fuengirola, Malaga, Marbella, Torremolinos and Velez Malaga.
OP
Hi James,
I appreciate the response.
That said, there are always potential pitfalls in transferring a story from a space limited offline magazine to the essentially unlimited online world and in this case the OP fell right into one!
Thanks very much for providing the extra details.
Publishing one story for both the printed and online versions is the error here. They are not the same medium. Stories should be expanded in the online version, not minimised.
Any ideas as to what will happen to the court house in Ronda then?… Cost a fortune to build, very posh and a couple of years down the line it gets closed? Interesting and witty comments only please… :)
You both make valid points. It is not always straightforward using the same content for both print and online, but on the whole we like to think the quality and quantity of the content in the print edition and on the website has improved greatly over the last couple of years and we’re working hard to make sure it continues that way. As ever, all constructive feedback is appreciated.
James
I’ve never seen the print version of the OP so couldn’t really opine about that but clearly transposing its content to the web isn’t always going to work. Mind you, I’d contend that the above story wouldn’t be all that in print either!
On an unrelated issue, why are you stripping out my URL from the published comments when you are providing a box for me to enter it?
James, perhaps you can tell your editor to stop censoring posts as well? You omit much constructive feedback when it doesn’t suit the OP, and that is poor journalism.
For example, when I pointed out that the “Viabator” energy saving device for cars is total nonsense and doesn’t work on the grounds of basic physics, you removed the comment. How does that help the reader exactly?