1. Welcome to SportsJournalists.com, a friendly forum for discussing all things sports and journalism.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register for a free account to get access to the following site features:
    • Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
    • Access to private conversations with other members.
    • Fewer ads.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!

And the next fist fight at WashPost will be...

Discussion in 'Journalism topics only' started by JayFarrar, Nov 3, 2009.

  1. SF_Express

    SF_Express Active Member

    Several things here:

    1) I've worked with national-level columnists who are as clean as a whistle, and I've worked with those who have a typo issue. Depending on how long they've been doing this, it's simply in their DNA. It's not going to change. You decide whether the typos are worth the great work that includes them. When you're at this level, the answer is generally yes.

    2) While Boswell has not always been my cup of tea, there's no question he's one of the best in the country, particularly at baseball. So the Post asks itself: Do we want to risk a few typos to have Boswell writing every day at the series, on really tight deadlines, considering who he is and what he brings to the table? And, of course, the answer is yes. When he files 10 minutes before deadline, you're going to get typos. Just a matter of how many. And, as the ombudsman explains, the earlier deadlines make it pretty much all or nothing. Either you accept that there will be issues, you go 30 minutes late, or you don't let him write the Series. And Nos. 2 and 3 are not an option.

    3) Shaggy, no disrespect intended, but telling Tom Boswell this--"Tight deadline or not, don't writers do a quick read-through of their work before they send it? I'm talking a 90-second skimming. Unless you're an idiot (which I know Boswell is not), a quick skim would've caught at least 30 percent of those typos"--is pointless. Of course it's possible. But at this point in his career, are you likely to get this from Boswell, on deadline when he's flying? No. And if you come back with "well, he should," yeah, well, at this point in my career, I've learned: Every writer has issues; you take what you get from them. Boswell is going to be sloppy on deadline, and that's the story. He's not going to change. Again, you weigh the good with the bad -- and the Post wants Boswell in the paper.

    4) SixToe, errors like "bare vs. bear" or whatever are going to happen when you're in a hurry, just like any other typo. Of course he knows the difference. He just didn't have time to think about it.

    5. Jay, having Boswell focus on some early part of the game that might be irrelevant when the game is over is a waste of Boswell. That's not why you have him at the World Series. You have him to analyze the game as a whole. So he waits until the end. Otherwise, why bother?

    And Moddy, that IS the beauty of the 'Net now. You get that sloppy first-edition column from Boswell in the print edition, and then you clean it up, and people CAN see what was intended, in all its pristine glory.

    I've put a lot of crap into the newspaper on deadline over the years, and if I left all the crap out, I would have sent out quite a few blank white pages. You take the situation, the writers, the deadlines and the length of the event as the hand you're dealt, you deal with it the best you can, you clean up after yourself the best you can until the final edition is off, and then you move on to the next day -- but now, you can also move onto the Web and get things as clean as a whistle, an option we've only had for a while now.

    It's the nature of the beast.
     
  2. SF_Express

    SF_Express Active Member

    Oddly, Boswell said basically the same thing I did. I just don't think he needed the apology. :)
     
  3. Double Down

    Double Down Well-Known Member

    An excellent post, as always SF_Express.

    Writing that kind of column is really, really fucking hard. Don't care how good you are. Doesn't mean it should be better, but saying "Oh, just read it over before you send it" is to fail to understand how the human mind works in that situation. Sure, there are columnists who could hand in perfectly clean copy, but they might not be nearly as insightful as Boswell in the mad rush to deadline. There are only a handful of people who can keep their head when all about them are losing theirs. [/kipling] There is an even smaller number who can do that, AND keep it clean. There are even fewer in that group who can do it, consistently, into their 50s and 60s. I've seen a ton of people talk tough and then absolutely die on tight deadlines at big events. I once wrote a very good story on a horrible, horrible deadline for a huge event at the Olympics -- clean, interesting, insightful -- and then went into an empty stairwell and fought back tears for several minutes because I was so stressed out.

    At some point, we'll do this strictly on the web and it won't be an issue. Until then, we'll fight the good fight and hope we win more than we lose.
     
  4. Dave Kindred

    Dave Kindred Member

    Two things
    .
    "Strictly on the web" is maybe not a long way off but not so near that we can kiss off print.

    "It won't be an issue" -- It'd be an issue for me if the NYT is up with its package 15 minutes after a game and The Post's is an hour later. Aren't we being taught now that we're wire services reborn, "first with the story" matters more than "right with the story"?
     
  5. AD

    AD Active Member

    great discussion, all in all. this thread is exactly what i love about this site. thanks, everyone....
     
  6. Dave Kindred

    Dave Kindred Member

    I should also say that on-deadline columns are thrilling to do. You're on a high wire in the wind. When you get to the other side, as DD said, you're exhausted, but if you're any good at it -- or even if you've fallen, or especially if you've fallen -- you want to get back up there because, to quote Karl Wallenda, "To be on the wire is life."

    And I'm with SF -- Boz was there, he brought his inimitable baseball mind to what he saw, and so what if his exertions caused his shirttail to pop out a couple times? I bet he still made better music than anyone else in the sweaty orchestra that night....
     
  7. clutchcargo

    clutchcargo Active Member

    Couple thoughts:

    1. Ombud guy says desk pushed the button on Boz's column at 12:25 for a 12:30 drop dead. Having been in similar spots hundreds of times as both writer and then line editor, those extra five minutes could have gone a long way in fixing this. For many, focus is much more intense in those last-minute scrambles and plenty of time to catch more typos. Considering what some folks are saying about Boz's typical copy and prior knowledge of such, his column should have been last one pushed, at 12:29. That's four extra minutes---an eternity for an eagle-eyed copyeditor with the adrenaline pumping.

    2. Ombud also mentions earlier deadlines to get paper out earlier on the other end. Understood. But not a great excuse. What if deadline is instead 12:45 or 1. Or 1:30? Moot point if game is going that much later.

    3. In recent years, I have worked with a very good columnist who will go unnamed who is a master at writing a plenty-early column keying in on something from early in the game, then turning the reworked game-centered column late for a second print deadline or web. And both stand well on their own, and he's a nice word crafter at that. Doesn't read rushed or lame. Sure, it's more work for him, but he lives his work, and, yes, he is old school.
     
  8. huntsie

    huntsie Active Member

    I love the rush to deadline, both as the writer and the desker (We're a small shop, so I get regular cracks at both.) It's Thomas Boswell, but just because it's Thomas Boswell, you don't ask readers to accept typos, do you?
    It's on the copy editor more than anyone else, I think. You know it's Boswell, it's coming late, you know the spelling will be rough. Do what you can until they're screaming at you that it's got to go.
    Send it at 12:29.
     
  9. YGBFKM

    YGBFKM Guest

    I understand completely where you're coming from, huntsie, because I've been on both sides. But I think this is on Boswell just as much as the desk. If your name is on something, you should do a better job of checking your work before you send it in. "I've always sucked at spelling" is not a legitimate excuse for any professional writer, much less a nationally known columnist.
     
  10. Fran Curci

    Fran Curci Well-Known Member

    If the deadline is 12:30, will anyone complain if you send it at 12:34? I hope not. So now we have an extra nine minutes, and that's a long time.

    That said, writing that kind of column on that kind of deadline is very difficult and would absolutely terrify and paralyze most people.
     
  11. imjustagirl

    imjustagirl Active Member

    One minute in Richmond got you a visit from the ME on duty. Who wanted a VERY detailed explanation of what happened and who caused you to be late.
     
  12. JackReacher

    JackReacher Well-Known Member

    At both papers I worked, yes. However, if your deadline record is spotless or pretty close to spotless, you might be able to slide once or twice without catching too much crap. All depends on who you work for, I suppose.

    I think I missed deadline 2 or 3 times in the 2 years I was at my last paper, but I don't remember catching too much crap about it. Also, I worked for pretty decent people. That's obviously not the case everywhere.
     
Draft saved Draft deleted

Share This Page