My only quibble is that the memo then has a long list seeking to spell out in detail what should be broken on the Web in advance and what shouldn't. Why get so tied down in rules? Many of the kinds of stories that the Inquirer wants to hold back from the Web until the morning that it's in the paper -- investigative reporting and columns, for example -- are exactly the kinds of articles that can be pumped up by using the Web to build interest. Why couldn't the author of a big scoop do a two-minute advance YouTube-style video to promote it? I've also become a strong believer in "crowdsourcing" -- which is investigative reporting the exact backwards way from how it's done at the Inquirer and at most newspapers, by letting everyone in the world know what you're working on and asking for reader tips and input. But at least this memo is a step forward, and not "Back to the Future IV."