Copy editors an engangered species

[Ace]

MinnPost.com reports that the Star-Tribune shed 60 percent of its copy editing positions among recent layoffs and buyouts ...


http://www.minnpost.com/braublog/2010/01/29/15437/the_star_tribunes_layoffbuyout_list

 

[Michael_ Gee]

Because when you're having trouble selling a product, dumping quality control is always the way to go.

 

[Big Circus]

Subject line for this post: is it meta?

 

[Ace]

Subject line for this post: is it meta?

Could have been more obvious, I guess.

 

[Baron Scicluna]

And to think, when I first started in this businesss 15 years ago, I was encouraged to become a copy editor because reporters were considered a dime a dozen and that someone who wanted a copy editing career would go far in newspapers.

 

[imjustagirl]

And to think, when I first started in this businesss 15 years ago, I was encouraged to become a copy editor because reporters were considered a dime a dozen and that someone who wanted a copy editing career would go far in newspapers.

Reporters are a dime a dozen now. They're just called "Citizen Journalists" or "Bloggers."

 

[Baron Scicluna]

And to think, when I first started in this businesss 15 years ago, I was encouraged to become a copy editor because reporters were considered a dime a dozen and that someone who wanted a copy editing career would go far in newspapers.

Reporters are a dime a dozen now. They're just called "Citizen Journalists" or "Bloggers."

Now, I guess reporters are now a nickel a dozen, if you add in all the "Citizen Journalists" and "Bloggers".

 

[Fredrick]

I think I mentioned this before, but check around and you'll see what I'm talking about.
The latest thing from the Social Media Experts is copy editors aren't needed any more. The online reader will be encouraged to be the copy editors of stories. Why? This will add more page views as readers will be in power. They will be the ones catching errors and pointing them out in the reader comments section following the stories. Then it will be the reporter's responsibility to re-enter into the story online, fix it and apologize for the error and/or thank the dear reader in the comments section.

It's a way of empowering the online reader, getting page views. And it devalues the reporter even more. The social media experts are saying the reporter should not make mistakes in the first place so it is silly to hire somebody to fix the errors when online readers can do that and add page views in the process. I know a few people in management of a major chain who have shown me some emails on the matter.

You save money by getting rid of the copy editors and being able to use all fresh faced reporters out of college because poor quality writing actually will help the page view count as readers love catching errors and demeaning the reporter for his/her incompetence.

How do you copy editors feel about this? I promise you this is true. You'll be hearing about it more and more. That's why we're hearing about so many copy editors already being let go in advance of the all online product.

 

[The No. 7]

And to think, when I first started in this businesss 15 years ago, I was encouraged to become a copy editor because reporters were considered a dime a dozen and that someone who wanted a copy editing career would go far in newspapers.

That's what I was told not even five years ago. Now, I'm studying to be an accountant and preparing to leave this world behind because the future isn't looking so bright for us copy editors.

 

[Stitch]

I know an SE who doesn't like copy editors. The reason being is that they always seem to fix his horrible copy.

 

[Magic In The Night]

Judging by the thread title: probably not.

 

[Fredrick]

All we need to know about our profession is the elimination of copy editors. It shows us how quality matters not anymore.

 

[Football_Bat]

Endangered? Without question.

Engangered? Ditto. 8)

 

[imjustagirl]

The fact that people read this board, read Ace's posts, and not just one person (who was corrected) but THREE PEOPLE would think the thread title was a typo is blowing my mind.

 

[greenlantern]

I think I mentioned this before, but check around and you'll see what I'm talking about.
The latest thing from the Social Media Experts is copy editors aren't needed any more. The online reader will be encouraged to be the copy editors of stories. Why? This will add more page views as readers will be in power. They will be the ones catching errors and pointing them out in the reader comments section following the stories. Then it will be the reporter's responsibility to re-enter into the story online, fix it and apologize for the error and/or thank the dear reader in the comments section.

It's a way of empowering the online reader, getting page views. And it devalues the reporter even more. The social media experts are saying the reporter should not make mistakes in the first place so it is silly to hire somebody to fix the errors when online readers can do that and add page views in the process. I know a few people in management of a major chain who have shown me some emails on the matter.

You save money by getting rid of the copy editors and being able to use all fresh faced reporters out of college because poor quality writing actually will help the page view count as readers love catching errors and demeaning the reporter for his/her incompetence.

How do you copy editors feel about this? I promise you this is true. You'll be hearing about it more and more. That's why we're hearing about so many copy editors already being let go in advance of the all online product.

And journalism dies a little more.

 

[I Should Coco]

I went to school with one of the copy editors named in that link, Ace. I wish the best to him and the others who were canned, "voluntarily" or not.

And as a member of this "engangered" breed (yes, I got the joke), I agree with what many others have said on here:

Between laying off copy editors, combining production departments for papers in several different states, and focusing on Twitter, online video and other gimmicks instead of reporting, it seems clear that newspaper companies will do anything to save themselves EXCEPT improve the quality of their newspapers.

Sad stuff.

 

[txsportsscribe]

The fact that people read this board, read Ace's posts, and not just one person (who was corrected) but THREE PEOPLE would think the thread title was a typo is blowing my mind.

yep

 

[Ace]

I went to school with one of the copy editors named in that link, Ace. I wish the best to him and the others who were canned, "voluntarily" or not.

And as a member of this "engangered" breed (yes, I got the joke), I agree with what many others have said on here:

Between laying off copy editors, combining production departments for papers in several different states, and focusing on Twitter, online video and other gimmicks instead of reporting, it seems clear that newspaper companies will do anything to save themselves EXCEPT improve the quality of their newspapers.

Sad stuff.

If I could find a suitable job in another profession, I would jump.

The main reason isn't that I fear for my job so much or am tired of newspaper reporting.

I realize that we are struggling, but the industry continues to make short-sighted decisions that continually weaken the product. It's hard to feel positive about that.

 

[Mystery Meat II]

The fact that people read this board, read Ace's posts, and not just one person (who was corrected) but THREE PEOPLE would think the thread title was a typo is blowing my mind.

This is the board filled with people who assume themselves to be part of the intellectually elite yet need a special font to denote sarcasm.

But he DID misspell engangrerd.

 

[Ace]

OK, OK. I confess. I typed it out that way by accident.

I immediately noticed the error and thought it added just the right touch.

So if you thought it was a typo. You are correct.

If you thought it was done on purpose. You are also correct.

Thank yew.