I've never understood how editors decide whether a tragic story in the news rises to the level worthy of a "how-to-help" side article explaining how readers can donate or help solve the problem.

Denver Post Editor Greg Moore explained to me that to land in the newspaper, a fundraising effort usually has to "develop on its own" and be connected to a "reputable institution."

"If there were a fire that destroyed 15 apartments and threw 40 people out on the street, we would ask if anybody was setting up a fund," he told me. "And if that were the case, we'd put that in the paper."

This approach seems random to me - and tilted in favor of popular causes.

For example, a memorial fund was cited in the Post (Aug. 29) for a 9-year-old killed in a hit-and-run, but no fundraising campaign has been launched in response to the death of the 10-year-old caught last week in an apparent gang crossfire.

Why not offer readers the option of donating to an anti-gang organization, even if no specific fund has been set up?

Rocky Mountain News Editor John Temple opposes doing this in "nearly all cases" because "there's an implied endorsement" and "we often can't be sure where the money will go."

To address this, editors could write "The Rocky doesn't endorse this organization but offers this information as a public service."

As it is, both dailies are Grinch-like in their dispensation of information on how to help disaster-stricken people we read about in the news.

Over the past six months, the Rocky had about 20 stories with how-you- can-donate information. The Post had half as many. (This doesn't include Season to Share stories, which profile local nonprofits at year's end.)

That's dismally low when you think of all the horror we read about. The dailies should aim to run a "help box" every day, with more links online.

Actually, journalists should go further and offer options to help solve problems, as the San Francisco Chronicle does. Chronicle Editor Phil Bronstein calls it "journalism of action," a concept espoused by William Randolph Hearst. "You provide people with all the information they need to do something," Bronstein told me. "Not just, here are the facts. Or, here's a problem, and that's it."

So, the Chronicle will not only explain "which congressperson to call and that sort of thing" but also select stories that focus on a decision-maker. (Read my Bronstein interview online at www.bigmedia.org).

Newspapers have a self-interest in doing this because giving people information on how to donate and solve their community's problems is good for journalism. It creates a stronger connection between people and the issues reporters write about, making us more likely to be interested in the news.

Front-page gangs. The Rocky (Nov. 30) did the right thing by running Page 1 MySpace photos of the 10-year-old likely killed in gang violence. They showed the girl and her mother apparently making gang signals, as well as the father waving a gun.

Journalists shouldn't always publish photos like this, especially on the front page, because it's not in the public interest to make celebrities of possible gang members, unless there's a good reason.

But the girl's photos (brought to the Rocky's attention by an anonymous tipster, according to reporter Jeff Kass) helped readers understand her family situation unlike anything imaginable. They advanced the story.

The Post only had photos of the father, and without the photo of the girl, editors made the right call to publish its images only on the Post Web site, not in the newspaper.

The Post's Moore explained the decision: "Part of it was residual from the Virginia Tech shooting. I didn't really think, in retrospect, that the MySpace photo added much to that story, and I definitely didn't feel like this story called for publishing photos of folks flashing gang signs."

Who's soft? Vague writing makes for good propaganda but bad journalism. Just ask George Orwell.

A Nov. 26 Post article states that Democrats are "seen by some as soft" on immigration. What does "soft" mean, in the context of the immigration debate? Anyone who disagrees with U.S. Rep. Tom Tancredo? If so, President George Bush is soft. It's accurate that Democrats are "seen by some as soft" on immigration, but it's meaningless without specifics.

Closure. Newsweek has a feature called "Closure," with updates on news stories that "captivate us for a moment, then vanish."

Local journalists should give this a shot. They could start with Mike Jones, who said he had sex with the Rev. Ted Haggard and surfaced this week claiming he serviced Republican Sen. Larry Craig. And there's lots of other local material to draw on.

Pot clarity. My last column should have stated that Denver arrests 10 times more people for marijuana possession than Seattle.

Jason Salzman, president of Cause Communications and board chairman of Rocky Mountain Media Watch, is the author of Making the News: A Guide for Activists and Nonprofits.