Copy editors on the Web

[MrBSquared]

I see more and more stuff like this on Web sites:

"He approached the media hoard with a smile that could charm a supermodel — and has."

That is Alex Marvez' lead on the Fox Sports site, the opening to his feature on Tom Brady.

Didn't know the NFL was stockpiling reporters ... thought that was MLB.com's job.

The word is horde ...

With all the capable copy editors out there available these days, you'd think some of the bigger sites would cut back on the chaff (*cough* *cough* Reilly *cough* *cough*) and hire people to edit copy.

Just a thought.

 

[da man]

Copy editors on the web?

Are there any?

 

[kleeda]

Lots of very talented ones on the web, doing at least triple the workload of those at newspapers. Next.

 

[Angola!]

Lots of very talented ones on the web, doing at least triple the workload of those at newspapers. Next.

Which is why the thread starter said more of the ones who are out of work should be hired.

 

[imjustagirl]

Right. But kleeda was answering da man.

 

[kleeda]

Angola, I think that ship sailed and was then lost at sea.

 

[SF_Express]

Lots of very talented ones on the web, doing at least triple the workload of those at newspapers. Next.

Which is why the thread starter said more of the ones who are out of work should be hired.

Um, see the "ESPN is not immune" thread for starters.

Unfortunately, just because there are a lot of good copy editors available out there doesn't mean the big sports websites are in a position to go out and hire a bunch of them. As for us, we haven't had a desk opening in months. And yeah, I suppose a 20-year veteran might be a nice addition, but we're happy with the progress of the younger people we have. And let me tell you, as referenced by Kleeda, they're busting their ass from wire to wire every night.

These "I found a typo, the web needs better copy editors" threads generally really **** me off.

Every newspaper from Gutenberg on has dealt with typos. Many made it into daily newspapers during the "golden years." It's a fact of life in the daily media business. You aim for zero tolerance, fix the ones you catch and move on. The beauty of the web, of course, is errors can always be fixed.

The other side of the web is you're moving copy with NO deadline -- just a constant one -- and trying to deal with dozens of stories newspaper don't even need to look at because they know they don't have room.

I know of at least one person who will probably ding me for being an apologist for shoddy work, but that's OK (I know better): My point is simply that finding a typo in a story doesn't illustrate **** when it comes to quality control at any level of media, from the New York Times on down.

 

[I Should Coco]

Good points by SF. And I'm going to say something positive about our shop's Web site (for possibly the only time).

We try to post local sports stories (like today's prelim results from the state track meet) online as soon as we're done reading through them. Sometimes, one of our staffers who's off-duty will read it online and point out a typo before it gets in print. Other times, we'll see a typo on a page proof, then go and correct it online also.

Mistakes will happen, but as SF said, the online errors have more opportunities to be fixed.

 

[imjustagirl]

The other side of the web is you're moving copy with NO deadline -- just a constant one -- and trying to deal with dozens of stories newspaper don't even need to look at because they know they don't have room.

This is the TRUTH. In Richmond, we basically did an NBA roundup. You'd take 3 grafs of the lead game and one sentence of every other one.

Online? Not only do we have each game's gamer, but we have to re-edit every edition that moves (no waiting for the optional) plus do the little info boxes, so we're basically editing every game story at least three times.

Also, all that **** about Germans setting world records in pole vaults that your paper never looks at? Stories about the court struggle over the America's Cup? Stories about little league no-hitters? Yep. Those are on our slates too.

 

[dreunc1542]

The other side of the web is you're moving copy with NO deadline -- just a constant one -- and trying to deal with dozens of stories newspaper don't even need to look at because they know they don't have room.

This is the TRUTH. In Richmond, we basically did an NBA roundup. You'd take 3 grafs of the lead game and one sentence of every other one.

Online? Not only do we have each game's gamer, but we have to re-edit every edition that moves (no waiting for the optional) plus do the little info boxes, so we're basically editing every game story at least three times.

Also, all that **** about Germans setting world records in pole vaults that your paper never looks at? Stories about the court struggle over the America's Cup? Stories about little league no-hitters? Yep. Those are on our slates too.

Now that's just ridiculous. The men's record hasn't been broken in years and if anyone's going to set a women's pole vault record, it's going to be Isinbayeva, a Russian. :)

 

[OTD]

Also, all that **** about Germans setting world records in pole vaults that your paper never looks at? Stories about the court struggle over the America's Cup? Stories about little league no-hitters? Yep. Those are on our slates too.

Nothing about the Belgian pole vaulters? How are they going to get scholarships if you don't write about them too? They try just as hard--it's not their fault they're on the only road from Berlin to Paris.

 

[imjustagirl]

I'd watch a Road Movie to Berlin.

 

[Bob Crotchet]

Lots of very talented ones on the web, doing at least triple the workload of those at newspapers. Next.

Which is why the thread starter said more of the ones who are out of work should be hired.

Um, see the "ESPN is not immune" thread for starters.

Unfortunately, just because there are a lot of good copy editors available out there doesn't mean the big sports websites are in a position to go out and hire a bunch of them. As for us, we haven't had a desk opening in months. And yeah, I suppose a 20-year veteran might be a nice addition, but we're happy with the progress of the younger people we have. And let me tell you, as referenced by Kleeda, they're busting their ass from wire to wire every night.

These "I found a typo, the web needs better copy editors" threads generally really **** me off.

Every newspaper from Gutenberg on has dealt with typos. Many made it into daily newspapers during the "golden years." It's a fact of life in the daily media business. You aim for zero tolerance, fix the ones you catch and move on. The beauty of the web, of course, is errors can always be fixed.

The other side of the web is you're moving copy with NO deadline -- just a constant one -- and trying to deal with dozens of stories newspaper don't even need to look at because they know they don't have room.

I know of at least one person who will probably ding me for being an apologist for shoddy work, but that's OK (I know better): My point is simply that finding a typo in a story doesn't illustrate **** when it comes to quality control at any level of media, from the New York Times on down.

It's not what I consider a "typo." He didn't transpose two letters. Someone -- writer or copy editor -- doesn't know the difference or didn't correct it. And yes, it is a matter of standards. It's a common homophone. It isn't a stretch to expect someone who works with words to know the difference.

 

[da man]

The other side of the web is you're moving copy with NO deadline -- just a constant one -- and trying to deal with dozens of stories newspaper don't even need to look at because they know they don't have room.

This is the TRUTH. In Richmond, we basically did an NBA roundup. You'd take 3 grafs of the lead game and one sentence of every other one.

Online? Not only do we have each game's gamer, but we have to re-edit every edition that moves (no waiting for the optional) plus do the little info boxes, so we're basically editing every game story at least three times.

Also, all that **** about Germans setting world records in pole vaults that your paper never looks at? Stories about the court struggle over the America's Cup? Stories about little league no-hitters? Yep. Those are on our slates too.

Which I think was the original point. Maybe you need more copy editors to help you plow through all that with fewer mistakes, and there are plenty of them out there (copy editors, not mistakes).

 

[SixToe]

It's not what I consider a "typo." He didn't transpose two letters. Someone -- writer or copy editor -- doesn't know the difference or didn't correct it. And yes, it is a matter of standards. It's a common homophone. It isn't a stretch to expect someone who works with words to know the difference.

I agree with this.

The industry is losing experienced copy editors. The new ones may be working hard, as SF noted. I'm glad they are and hope the veteran editors will help them develop their skills.

But journalists should know the difference between horde and hoard, and use the correct one.

 

[SF_Express]

I gotta tell you, everybody: I'm supposed to be halfway decent at this, and I still make "their/there" mistakes when I'm in a hurry. I guess maybe hoard/horde should be looked at a little more carefully because it's not nearly as prevalent, but still...

 

[MileHigh]

I'm with SF on this, from the earlier post and the one above.