This is why you don't put jokes on the page

[DeskMonkey1]

http://jimromenesko.com/2015/01/08/kentucky-newspaper-retracts-major-error-in-police-story/

"Sheriff John Ward denies telling that to the Elizabethtown (KY) News-Enterprise. The correct quote, he says, is that officers go into law enforcement “because they have a desire to serve the community.”"

 

[Steak Snabler]

Somebody certainly learned the hard way.

For those too lazy to follow the link, somebody edited in "because they have a desire to shoot minorities."

Two copy deskers were fired.

 

[BDC99]

Yikes! Why would anyone do that? I'm sure that if it's a small paper much of the desk staff is fairly young, but damn is that dumb.

 

[Ace]

The most surprising thing is that the Etown paper still proofs pages.

 

[LongTimeListener]

That really sucks for the reporter, who undoubtedly is going to have to live this down to some degree.

The editor who put it in has to be on the short list of the dumbest people ever to work in newspapers. Sorry if he's your friend, but Jesus H. Christ.

 

[playthrough]

What LTL said. Life for that reporter isn't going to be easy.

Horrible error and this retraction doesn't quite cut it for me. Typographical mistake?

A story on Page A1 in today's print edition contains a major error and misquotes Sheriff John Ward in a paraphrased statement. The version online has been corrected. The newspaper formally apologizes to the sheriff and other law-enforcement officers offended by its typographical mistake. - Ben Sheroan, editor.

 

[Ace]

How would you characterize it? Gonna say in print it was just a joke that got in print? It's just so awful it's hard to characterize it.

 

[playthrough]

I agree, Ace. It's hard to characterize it and I don't necessarily think you should repeat the mistake verbatim. But a typographical mistake would be turning "public" into "pubic." Not this.

 

[Ace]

I agree, play t. Understates it.

 

[LesJ9488]

The paper issued a much better response tonight, after investigating the issue fully. Their editor is really one of the good guys and I feel for the repair work ahead of him.

http://www.thenewsenterprise.com/content/apology-error-should-not-have-happened

 

[BDC99]

Man, that reporter must have been blindsided by that. She must have been livid!

 

[DeskMonkey1]

They deserved to be fired but I can't help but to feel sorry for them, particularly the younger one. The 32-year-old wrote what should have been an obvious joke but an inexperienced co-worker believed him/her and let a horrible mistake get into print. It will be very difficult for these two to find work in the field, a field in which the 23-year-old probably trained for in college and now has nothing to show for it.

 

[Big Circus]

Agree, DeskMonkey. He really was the lesser perpetrator. He ****ed up, but not enough to end his journalism career, which is probably the case here.

At least he's young enough to make a career change. The older coworker may have done him a favor in the long run.

 

[BDC99]

Agree, DeskMonkey. He really was the lesser perpetrator.

Not sure about this. The kid has to be smart enough to realize no LEO would ever say such an inflammatory thing. But maybe like a lot of places, he was working too fast to even process it.

 

[I Should Coco]

We three copy editors working tonight (I'm reading this during dinner break) had a good discussion about this. Not much sympathy here for either copy editor.

Most of our gallows humor/smartass comments are oral, not written, and this is why.

I know about honest mistakes which happen because you're rushing or were interrupted in the middle of laying out a page ... believe me, I've made those errors (in the December craziness, I left an obit mug box nameline as "Name" instead of typing in the deceased's name. Nobody caught it on the proof and I rightfully got a chew out for that).

But this is somebody screwing around, causing harm to the public official, reporter and entire newspaper. They deserved to be fired. Good luck to KY and all the other people at the paper who will be dealing with the fallout for quite a while.

 

[KYSportsWriter]

Man, that reporter must have been blindsided by that. She must have been livid!

Not so much livid as she was petrified, I would say. All the heat, from what I could tell early on in the day, was squarely on her. And then, as my editor and publisher's investigation began, it became clear that she wasn't at fault.

 

[BDC99]

Not so much livid as she was petrified, I would say. All the heat, from what I could tell early on in the day, was squarely on her. And then, as my editor and publisher's investigation began, it became clear that she wasn't at fault.

Yeah, I'm sure she was terrified of what was coming. I sure wouldn't want to be caught in the middle of that.

 

[DeskMonkey1]

Not so much livid as she was petrified, I would say. All the heat, from what I could tell early on in the day, was squarely on her. And then, as my editor and publisher's investigation began, it became clear that she wasn't at fault.

So, did those two copy editors even show up for work today or were they head off at the pass?

 

[KYSportsWriter]

So, did those two copy editors even show up for work today or were they head off at the pass?

As far as I know, they were both in the building at one point and then called into a meeting with the publisher and editor. They were both gone by the time I got to work around 3:30.

 

[Riptide]

Many of Thursday’s upset callers asked the same question: “Doesn’t anyone proof your newspaper?”

Well, surprisingly that’s where the error took place. A function and process designed to rid the news pages of error instead added a terrible one that altered the reporter’s original sentence. No reasonable excuse can exist.

How exactly did it happen in the proof process? Or did it not?