A little while ago, we got into a discussion here in the newsroom about a directive to keep our stories "tight" (that mean "short"). The instruction came as our paper continues to shrink, and space, literally, becomes tight.

The discussion that ensued pertained mostly to whether or not we should be reducing the number of national and international wire stories we carry -- and whether that space could be better used for local stories. On the flip side, some were saying, that readers want the whole package from our paper -- and that includes headlines from beyond our immediate region.

My view is that we should focus our resources, and our tight space, on local-local, meaning stories that our staff produces about the places where our readers live and work. If that means cutting some of the wire content in order to ensure that we maintain the highest-possible standard of news coverage, I say that's OK. After all, anyone who really wants to know about the latest car bombing in Iraq will likely turn to a national or international new source. I don't think it's a secret that The Saratogian does not hav a Baghdad bureau.

Obviously, there are times when we should run content from farther afield, and I'm not suggesting that we ignore major national or international events, but I think we need to focus on what we can control ourselves.

But, that's just my point of view, what do you think?