| name | managing-editor |
| description | Newsroom workflow air-traffic controller. Session management, TODO/tracker (red-green-refactor), human escalation via HUMAN_DO_THIS.md, pivot protocol (blocked → next investigation), archive protection (never delete unmined data), cross-desk coordination. |
Managing Editor Skill
Overview
The Managing Editor is the air-traffic controller for the entire newsroom workflow. This skill orchestrates:
- Session management (workspace cleanup, file organization)
- TODO/tracker management (agile-style progress, red-green-refactor mindset)
- Human escalation protocol (CAPTCHA, logins, physical records → HUMAN_DO_THIS.md)
- Pivot protocol (blocked on investigation A? switch to investigation B)
- Archive protection (never delete intermediate drafts with unmined data)
- Cross-desk coordination (sequencing skills in the right order)
- Investigation prioritization (which story next?)
This is the meta-level orchestration that keeps newsroom operations smooth and prevents bottlenecks.
Session Management & Workspace Cleanup
Canonical Workspace Structure
There is one workspace layout, shared with ../investigative-journalist/evidence-preservation-protocol.md. Every investigation session is built around a master-file.json (conforming to ../investigative-journalist/schemas/master-file.schema.json) and the three discipline directories: write-once evidence/, derived working/, and versioned drafts/. Do not invent a parallel folder scheme.
newsroom-workspace/
├── sessions/
│ ├── 2026-06-01-procurement-investigation/
│ │ ├── master-file.json ← canonical state (entities, evidence, claims, collection_log)
│ │ ├── evidence/ ← WRITE-ONCE originals, named by DOC id; never modified or deleted
│ │ │ ├── DOC-001-city-council-minutes.pdf
│ │ │ └── DOC-002-procurement-policy.pdf
│ │ ├── working/ ← derived copies: OCR text, cleaned CSVs, SQL, analysis (cite source DOC id)
│ │ │ ├── contracts-2020-2024.cleaned.csv
│ │ │ └── vendor-analysis.sql
│ │ ├── drafts/ ← immutable versioned drafts; new revision = new file
│ │ │ ├── 2026-06-08-part-1-v1.md
│ │ │ └── 2026-06-10-part-1-v2.md
│ │ ├── assets/ ← images, charts (with alt text + source attribution)
│ │ ├── TODO.md
│ │ └── README.md
│ └── [archived investigations — retained intact under legal hold...]
├── templates/
└── ACTIVE_INVESTIGATIONS.md
The legacy sources/ and data/ folders are superseded: originals live in evidence/, everything derived lives in working/. The append-only collection_log[] inside master-file.json replaces ad-hoc FOIA-response-log.md / NOTES.md provenance notes (those may remain as human-readable scratch, but the log is authoritative).
Session Cleanup Checklist
Before archiving a completed investigation:
Never delete:
- Raw data files (CSVs, PDFs, exports)
- Intermediate analysis (even if superseded)
- Email threads with sources
- Meeting notes or interview recordings
- Failed queries or approaches (shows rigor)
TODO Management (Red-Green-Refactor Cycle)
Automated State Synchronization Rule
[!IMPORTANT]
Whenever you modify the status tracking lines in this documentation tracker (e.g., updating headings to state status is RED, GREEN, or REFACTOR), you must programmatically sync the update to the machine-readable data layer. Update the corresponding investigation.status enum value (open, drafting, legal-review, published, archived) inside the central workspace master-file.json schema on the same execution turn to ensure zero drift between reporting states and script engines.
Borrow the TDD (test-driven development) mindset: Red → Green → Refactor.
Red Phase: Write the Investigation
Status: RED (work-in-progress, not publishable)
# Investigation: Procurement Breakdown
## TODO (Red Phase)
### Part 1: How One Vendor Got 94%
- [ ] Request FOIA: City contracts 2020–2024 *(DUE: March 10)*
- [ ] Receive and parse FOIA response *(DUE: March 25)*
- [ ] Build spreadsheet analyzing vendor concentration *(DUE: March 28)*
- [ ] Write draft article *(DUE: April 1)*
- [ ] Interview city procurement officer *(DUE: March 31)*
- [ ] Interview city council member *(DUE: March 31)*
- [ ] Get official response from mayor *(DUE: April 1)*
### Part 2: City Council Ignored Rules
- [ ] Obtain city procurement policy *(BLOCKED: waiting on Part 1 FOIA)*
- [ ] Cross-reference policy with actual awards *(BLOCKED)*
- [ ] Interview audit officer *(BLOCKED)*
- [ ] Write draft *(BLOCKED)*
### Part 3: Audit Trail Missing
- [ ] Request audit records via FOIA *(BLOCKED)*
- [ ] Obtain decision-making documents *(BLOCKED)*
## Status: RED
- Multiple blockers on Parts 2 & 3 (depend on Part 1 FOIA)
- Part 1 draft ready for copy-review (3/28)
- No legal review yet
Green Phase: Pass Copy & Legal Review
Status: GREEN (technically ready, awaiting publication)
## TODO (Green Phase)
### Part 1: Ready for Final Checkpoints
- [x] Draft written
- [x] Copy review passed
- [ ] Final legal review *(DUE: April 1)*
- [ ] Social hooks drafted *(DUE: March 31)*
- [ ] Images prepared *(DUE: March 31)*
- [ ] Metadata complete *(DUE: April 1)*
- [ ] Deploy to production *(DUE: April 1 at 10 AM)*
### Part 2: Copy Review Passed, Awaiting Legal
- [x] Draft written
- [x] Copy review passed
- [ ] Final legal review *(DUE: April 2)*
### Part 3: Draft Complete, Awaiting Copy
- [x] Draft written
- [ ] Copy review *(DUE: April 3)*
- [ ] Final legal review *(DUE: April 3)*
## Status: GREEN (Part 1 ready; Parts 2 & 3 in pipeline)
Refactor Phase: Post-Publication Learning
Status: REFACTOR (published; improve for next series)
## TODO (Refactor Phase)
### Learning from This Investigation
- [ ] Document what worked (FOIA timeline, interview strategy)
- [ ] Document what was slow (database queries, source tracking)
- [ ] Collect feedback from reporters and editors
- [ ] Update investigation templates based on lessons
- [ ] Archive all intermediate work (for legal defense)
- [ ] Create "playbook" for similar future investigations
## Metrics
- Time from FOIA request to publication: 47 days
- Number of sources interviewed: 9
- Traffic to Part 1 article: 12,400 views
- Social media engagement: 3,400 shares
- Reader corrections/complaints: 0
## Next Investigation
- Water contamination in county (ready to start March 15)
TODO Format
Use a simple, scannable format:
## Investigation: [Name]
### Current Status
- **RED / GREEN / REFACTOR**
- **Blockers:** [List blocking issues]
- **ETA to publication:** [Date]
- **Last updated:** [Date]
### Tasks (by article part)
#### Part 1: [Title]
- [x] Task completed
- [ ] Task pending (DUE: DATE)
- [ ] BLOCKED: Waiting for [blocker]
- [ ] ESCALATED: Requires human action in HUMAN_DO_THIS.md
#### Part 2: [Title]
- [ ] Task pending
- [ ] BLOCKED: Waiting for Part 1 FOIA response
### Blockers & Escalations
1. **FOIA delay** (city slow to respond to records request)
- Escalated to managing editor; considering legal pressure
- ETA: March 25
2. **Source unavailable** (procurement officer on leave)
- Escalated; trying to reach alternative official
- ETA: April 1
### Archive
- [x] All source documents saved
- [ ] All drafts versioned in git
- [ ] Chain of custody documented
- [ ] Final article published
HUMAN_DO_THIS.md Protocol
When an investigation hits a hard blocker (CAPTCHA, login requirement, physical records, manual phone call), document it in HUMAN_DO_THIS.md instead of stalling.
HUMAN_DO_THIS.md Structure
# Tasks Requiring Human Intervention
## Active Blockers
### BLOCKER 1: Paywall Access (Procurement Investigation)
**Investigation:** Procurement Breakdown (Part 2)
**Requirement:** Access city's document system to retrieve audit records
**Blocker Type:** Login/authentication required
**What needs to happen:**
1. Log into city's document portal (requires city employee credentials)
2. Download audit records for procurement decisions (2020–2024)
3. Save to: newsroom-workspace/2026-04-01-procurement-investigation/evidence/
**Why I can't do it:**
- Requires city employee login
- No newsroom employee has city credentials
- Portal may detect API/automated access
**Who should do it:**
- City employee contact: Jane Doe (jane.doe@city.gov)
- Or: Request via FOIA if public records
**Deadline:** April 1 (needed for Part 2)
**Status:** Pending human action
---
### BLOCKER 2: CAPTCHA on Government Website (Water Investigation)
**Investigation:** Water Contamination Study
**Requirement:** Download water quality reports from state environmental agency
**Blocker Type:** CAPTCHA blocking automated access
**What needs to happen:**
1. Visit: https://waterquality.state.gov/reports
2. Search for: "Contaminant levels by county 2024"
3. Download CSV (or screenshot if not downloadable)
4. Save to: newsroom-workspace/2026-03-15-water-contamination/evidence/
**Why I can't do it:**
- CAPTCHA prevents bot/automated access
- Manual human click required
**Who should do it:**
- Any newsroom staff (2 min task)
**Deadline:** ASAP (blocking data analysis)
**Status:** Pending human action
---
### BLOCKER 3: Restricted Document Access (City Council Records)
**Investigation:** Procurement Breakdown (Part 3)
**Requirement:** Access sealed city council executive session minutes
**Blocker Type:** Physical/restricted access required
**What needs to happen:**
1. Contact city clerk: John Smith (john.smith@city.gov, 555-1234)
2. Request unsealing of executive session minutes from 2022–2024
3. If approved, pick up documents at city hall OR request email delivery
4. Scan and save to: newsroom-workspace/2026-04-01-procurement-investigation/evidence/
**Why I can't do it:**
- Sealed records require legal authority/request
- Requires phone call or in-person visit
- Decision is subjective (city clerk may deny or require legal pressure)
**Who should do it:**
- Managing editor or reporter Alice
- May need attorney to send formal request
**Deadline:** April 2 (for Part 3)
**Status:** Pending human action
---
## Completed (Archive)
### ✓ COMPLETED: FOIA Request (Procurement Investigation)
- Requested: March 1
- Received: March 25
- Downloaded and saved to: sources/FOIA-contracts-2020-2024.csv
- Status: Archive complete
HUMAN_DO_THIS.md Workflow
- Reporter hits blocker → "This requires a login I don't have"
- Reporter documents in HUMAN_DO_THIS.md:
- What's blocking?
- Why can't the system do it?
- Exactly what needs to happen?
- Who should do it?
- Deadline?
- Managing editor reviews daily → Assigns human tasks
- Human completes task → Updates HUMAN_DO_THIS.md ("✓ COMPLETED")
- Workflow unblocked → System continues
Key principle: Escalation is not failure. It's tactical deferral—move on to the next task while humans handle the manual work.
Pivot Protocol (Blocked → Next Investigation)
When investigation A hits a blocker with no clear ETA, pivot to investigation B instead of stalling.
When to Pivot
Investigation A: FOIA request pending (ETA unknown)
Reporter Bob: "Nothing to do until city responds"
Decision: PIVOT
→ Pause Investigation A
→ Start Investigation B (water contamination; no blockers)
→ Revisit Investigation A when FOIA arrives
Pivot Workflow
- Identify blocker (FOIA delay, source unavailable, etc.)
- Check ETA (Is ETA >1 week away? Pivot candidate.)
- Check pipeline (Any other investigations ready to start?)
- Pause investigation A (document in TODO: "PAUSED—waiting for FOIA")
- Start investigation B (fresh reporter or same reporter on new story)
- Monitor A's status (check in daily; resume when unblocked)
Parallel Investigations
Maintain a pipeline of active investigations so reporters always have something to work on:
ACTIVE INVESTIGATIONS (priority order)
1. Procurement Breakdown (Part 1: READY FOR PUBLICATION)
Status: GREEN—awaiting legal review
Priority: URGENT (publish April 1)
2. Water Contamination Study (Data analysis phase)
Status: GREEN—FOIA received; analyzing now
Priority: HIGH (publish April 15)
3. Housing Discrimination Investigation (Research phase)
Status: RED—interviewing sources
Priority: MEDIUM (publish May 1)
4. School Budget Audit (Planning phase)
Status: RED—just started
Priority: MEDIUM (publish May 15)
## Reporters' Workflow
- Alice: Procurement (Part 1 final edits)
- Bob: Water contamination (data analysis)
- Carol: Housing discrimination (interviews)
- Dan: School budget (research) — if needed
Pivot Rules
- Never delete work from investigation A (archive it; pause the TODO)
- Don't start >3 major investigations simultaneously (too much chaos)
- Pivot every 1–2 weeks (keep momentum; prevent stalling on single story)
- Communicate pivots to reporter ("We're pausing Proc for 2 weeks; focus on Water")
Archive Protection & Legal Hold
NEVER delete intermediate work. Your archive is your legal defense.
You Are the Legal-Hold Authority
investigation.legal_hold defaults to true and stays true through publication and the limitations period after. The evidence-preservation-protocol routes every deletion request to you — agents are instructed never to delete unilaterally while a hold is active. When such a request reaches you:
- Do not approve deletion to "clean up," because a story was killed, or because the material turned out to be wrong. A killed or disproven story is archived intact — being wrong and able to show your work is a defense; an empty folder is consciousness of guilt.
- Legitimate reasons to lift a hold are narrow — e.g., a legal-counsel-directed source-protection redaction, or a retention period that has fully expired. These are counsel decisions, not editorial ones. Flag them to legal (see Escalation Triggers) and record the decision in
collection_log[] as a correction/log-amendment entry; never silently delete.
- Tamper check: if any file in
evidence/ no longer matches its recorded SHA-256 hash, treat it as a chain-of-custody incident — freeze the session and escalate immediately.
Verify Preservation at Every Desk Handoff
Run the evidence-preservation-protocol handoff checklist before accepting work from one desk into the next: every DOC item has a local copy + hash (+ archive URL if web-sourced), every claim cited in the current draft has a cited-in-draft log entry, and nothing has been deleted.
What to Archive (Never Delete)
Investigation Folder (canonical layout):
├── master-file.json ← canonical state + append-only collection_log
├── evidence/ ← WRITE-ONCE originals (never modified or deleted)
│ ├── DOC-001-FOIA-response-2026-03-25.pdf ← Original source, hashed at intake
│ ├── DOC-002-city-council-minutes.pdf ← Archived webpage + archive.today URL in custody
│ ├── DOC-010-alice-interview-transcript.txt ← Interview transcript (dated, contemporaneous)
│ ├── DOC-011-bob-interview-audio.mp3 ← Preserved as-is
│ └── DOC-020-email-thread-with-city.mbox ← Complete correspondence
├── working/ ← derived only; each cites its source DOC id
│ ├── cleaned-data.csv ← Processing steps (raw lives in evidence/)
│ ├── queries.sql ← All analysis queries
│ └── failed-queries.sql ← Show rigor (what didn't work)
├── drafts/ ← immutable versions; new revision = new file
│ ├── part-1-v1.md
│ ├── part-1-copy-reviewed.md
│ └── part-1-final.md
└── README.md ← summary; what was found; points to collection_log for chain of custody
Why Archive Matters
If article is challenged:
Lawyer: "Do you have evidence the mayor received that payment?"
You (with archive): "Yes. Here's the bank transfer (2020-06-15). Here's the FEC disclosure showing it wasn't reported. Here's the contract awarded two weeks later. Here's the query that found 0 other vendors solicited. All documented. Chain of custody shown."
You (without archive): "Uh... the reporter said they saw it, but I don't have the records anymore."
Cross-Desk Coordination
Not every investigation is solo. Coordinate across reporters and editors:
Skill Sequencing (The Correct Order)
Investigation Launch → Data Archivist
↓
Data Archivist creates schema, ingests FOIA data
↓
Data Queries → Reporter drafts article
↓
Copy Review → Copy editor checks readability/SEO/accessibility
↓
Final Editor Review → Editor checks libel/facts/verification
↓
Social Distributor → Marketing hooks drafted (before publication)
↓
Publish Article → Article goes live
↓
Social Distributor (continued) → Posts to all platforms
↓
Managing Editor → Archive verification; mark investigation COMPLETE
Bad Sequencing (What NOT to do)
Reporter writes article (no data analysis)
↓
Social Media posts before copy-review
↓
Publish Article (before legal review)
↓
Realize article has fact errors
↓
Panic; roll back; damage control
Skill Dependencies
| Skill | Depends On | Input | Output |
|---|
| Data Archivist | Investigation needs data | FOIA dumps, CSVs, PDFs | Database schema, cleaned data, queries |
| Reporter (Writing) | Data Archivist complete | Data queries, interviews, documents | Article draft |
| Copy Review | Draft article exists | Readability, SEO, accessibility | Copy-reviewed draft |
| Final Editor Review | Copy review complete | Libel risk, fact verification | Legal greenlight |
| Social Distributor | Legal greenlight obtained | Article text + imagery | Social hooks, OpenGraph metadata |
| Publish Article | All reviews complete | Final article + metadata | Live article + verification |
| Managing Editor | Publication complete | All work products | Archive + metrics |
Coordination Template
# Cross-Desk Coordination (Procurement Investigation)
## Workflow Timeline
| Phase | Owner | Deadline | Status |
|---|---|---|---|
| Data ingestion (FOIA → schema) | Alice (Data Archivist) | March 15 | ✓ Complete |
| Data analysis (queries) | Alice | March 20 | ✓ Complete |
| Article writing (Part 1) | Bob (Reporter) | March 28 | ✓ Complete |
| Copy review | Carol (Copy Editor) | March 30 | ⧳ In progress |
| Legal review | Dan (Editor-in-Chief) | April 1 | ◦ Pending |
| Social hooks | Carol (Social Distributor) | April 1 | ◦ Pending |
| Deployment | Alice (Tech) | April 1 10 AM | ◦ Pending |
## Handoff Checklist
- [ ] Data Archivist → Reporter: queries, analysis summary
- [ ] Reporter → Copy Editor: final draft, sources list
- [ ] Copy Editor → Final Editor: copy-reviewed draft, notes
- [ ] Final Editor → Social Distributor: approved article, image assets
- [ ] Social Distributor → Tech: social hooks, metadata
- [ ] Tech → Managing Editor: published article confirmation
Investigation Prioritization
Priority Matrix
Decide which investigation to start based on:
Impact (readers affected)
↑
URGENT | HIGH
·····················
|High · · Medium ·
| · · ·
| · START THIS ·
Ready · · ·
| · MEDIUM · LOW ·
| · · ·
| · BACKLOG · ·
↓─────────────────────────────→
Effort (time/resources)
URGENT + READY = Start immediately
HIGH + READY = Start next
MEDIUM = Backlog
LOW = Consider; may not pursue
Example Priority Assessment
| Investigation | Impact | Effort | Status | Priority | Start |
|---|
| Procurement (city contracts) | HIGH (taxpayer concern) | MEDIUM (data-heavy) | READY (FOIA in) | URGENT | Now |
| Water contamination | HIGH (health concern) | HIGH (field testing) | BLOCKED (waiting on lab) | HIGH | In 2 weeks |
| Housing discrimination | MEDIUM (specific community) | MEDIUM (interviews) | READY (sources lined up) | MEDIUM | In 4 weeks |
| School budget waste | LOW (technical/boring) | MEDIUM (audit records) | READY | LOW | Archive |
Daily Managing Editor Check-In
Morning ritual (10 min):
# Daily Status Check (April 2, 2026)
## Investigations Status
- [ ] Procurement (Part 1): PUBLISHED ✓ | Part 2: Copy review in progress
- [ ] Water: Data analysis on track | No blockers
- [ ] Housing: Interview scheduled for today at 2 PM
- [ ] School: Awaiting school district response (ETA: April 5)
## Blockers & Escalations
- [ ] Review HUMAN_DO_THIS.md (any new escalations?)
- [ ] Check FOIA status (any responses?)
- [ ] Follow up on source callbacks
## Upcoming Deadlines
- Part 2 copy review: Due EOD April 2
- Part 2 legal review: Due April 3
- Water article draft: Due April 5
- Housing interviews: Due April 8
## Action Items
- [ ] Email city clerk re: Part 3 audit trail access
- [ ] Call school district re: budget documents
- [ ] Remind Bob (reporter) of April 5 deadline
Common Mistakes & Red Flags
Management Mistakes
| Mistake | Why It's Bad | Fix |
|---|
| No TODO tracking; work ad-hoc | Tasks slip; deadlines missed; unclear who's doing what | Create central TODO.md; update daily |
| Delete old drafts to "clean up" | Lose chain of custody; can't defend published claims | Never delete; archive everything |
| Start 5 investigations simultaneously | Chaos; reporters overwhelmed; nothing ships | Limit to 3 active; pivot when blocked |
| No pivot protocol; stall on single FOIA | Reporters sit idle; momentum dies | Pivot to other story; come back when FOIA arrives |
| Forget about escalated task in HUMAN_DO_THIS.md | Task never completes; investigation stalls | Review HUMAN_DO_THIS.md daily |
| Publish article, forget social marketing | Low traffic; article doesn't reach audience | Social distribution is part of workflow |
Coordination Mistakes
| Mistake | Why It's Bad | Fix |
|---|
| Reporter writes article before data is analyzed | Analysis shows article was wrong; massive rewrite | Enforce skill sequencing; data first, writing second |
| Social hooks posted before legal review | Misleading hook; legal liability | Legal review before social marketing |
| Publish without updating landing page/index | Readers can't find article; low traffic | Publishing includes index updates |
| No handoff protocol between desks | Work repeats; miscommunication; quality drops | Require explicit handoff checklist between phases |
Escalation Triggers
Escalate to publisher/legal if:
Metrics & Learning
After each investigation, measure:
investigation:
name: "Procurement Breakdown"
published: "2026-04-01 to 2026-04-03"
metrics:
timeline:
start_date: "2026-02-01"
publication_date: "2026-04-01"
duration_weeks: 8
bottleneck: "FOIA response (3 week delay)"
resources:
reporters: 1
editors: 2
time_investment_hours: 240
reach:
article_views: 12400
social_shares: 3400
newsletter_signups: 210
reader_complaints: 0
quality:
corrections_needed: 0
legal_challenges: 0
source_complaints: 0
learning:
what_worked: "FOIA strategy was efficient; interviews were credible"
what_was_slow: "Database queries took longer than expected"
next_time: "Start data analysis immediately after FOIA filing; don't wait for response"
Managing Editor Checklist
Before marking investigation complete:
