The Long and Short of Story Length

Some stories end up being too brief. Chevy Chase reader S.J. Deitchman had a point when he wrote recently: "One of my complaints [is] the compression of interesting stories into few-line squibs that are just teasers. . . . The first one, what with the arguments about expanding effort in Iraq at the same time that the situation in Afghanistan is coming apart, merited a front-page story. As to the second, it sure would have been nice to know why someone would have attacked Elie Wiesel." The two briefs, in full:

· OTTAWA -- NATO's military mission to Afghanistan is in trouble and has little chance of success unless the alliance commits significantly more resources, a report by the Canadian Senate said.

· MONTGOMERY TOWNSHIP, N.J. -- Police arrested a man accused of roughing up Nobel laureate and Holocaust scholar Elie Wiesel, 78, at a San Francisco hotel this month, authorities said.

Journalists need to think first of readers and how much information they need and of the totality of the newspaper as it lands on readers' doorsteps. Post reporters and editors will concentrate on the right length, the right amount of background and context. That's not as easy as it sounds. It's easier to write longer than shorter.

Editors are the ultimate arbiters of story length. There are two main criteria -- a story's importance to readers and a narrative strength that makes it impossible to put down.

Washingtonpost.com also is open to experiments in this vein. Links from columns and stories can give readers much more information on the Web than there is room for in the paper. Associate Editor Robert Kaiser started a 27-part (27-part!) series on superlobbyist Gerald S.J. Cassidy with a long piece on Page 1 last Sunday. The last installment will be in the paper on April 8. The other 25 pieces will appear only on the Web.

As always, I'd like to hear your opinions on this subject.

Deborah Howell can be reached at 202-334-7582 or atombudsman@washpost.com.