'When we was ...'

[MisterCreosote]

How do you handle the 95 percent of athletes (and normal people) who say "gotta"?

In my experience, I have no problem exactly quoting someone who says "gotta." I also don't see a problem with PARAPHRASING it if it makes you uncomfortable.

Again, there are at least four easy and ethical options you can use before you get to the point of editing quotes.

Also, in my experience, 95 percent of quotes from athletes could easily be deleted from stories anyway, with little to no impact on its overall quality.

 

[MisterCreosote]

You're either for quoting someone verbatim or you're not. Doesn't make any difference to me which side of the fence you're on; just pick one.

In my example, I did quote someone verbatim.

I never said you have to use everything your subject says if you don't want to.

But, if you do use a quote, it should be exactly what was said.

 

[cranberry]

I always cleaned up quotes for players who are making an effort to communicate in a second or third language.

 

[RickStain]

But, if you do use a quote, it should be exactly what was said.

A pointless and impossible standard.

 

[MisterCreosote]

Paraphrasing, or omitting, is impossible?

 

[RickStain]

Paraphrasing, or omitting, is impossible?

Precisely and with 100% accuracy representing the spoken language in written quotes is impossible.

 

[MisterCreosote]

Rick, you're too smart for the "if we can't do it right 100 percent of the time, we should stop trying to get it right" argument.

 

[RickStain]

Rick, you're too smart for the "if we can't do it right 100 percent of the time, we should stop trying to get it right" argument.

That's begging the question.

The way to get it right is to translate the spoken word to the written word. Pretending that a transcript does this is like trying to use Google Translate on a web page.

 

[MisterCreosote]

The way to get it right is to translate the spoken word to the written word.

One might say that's a pointless and impossible distinction.

Really no need to belabor the stalemate.

 

[Mark2010]

Same as always:

I used to be on the "cleaning up is changing reality" side, but later converted to the "written English and spoken English are two different languages, and there's nothing wrong with translating one to the other."

Agreed.

 

[Mark2010]

I don't do anything anymore, because I'm not a journalist anymore.

For good reason, it looks like by this thread.

I've quoted mayors, governors, acting governors, police chiefs, state attorneys, county prosecutors, coaches, players, etc., and never altered their words once.

I quoted a business owner who had watched someone get shot to death literally 30 minutes before he spoke to me. Didn't alter his words either.

If that's not the way things are done now, fine. It's not my reputation on the line.

Do you tape everything and transcribe it? Or scribble stuff down on a notepad?

 

[thecool]

Wouldn't a high percentage of quotes (especially with high school and college athletes) contain the word "umm" scattered throughout if everyone wrote them verbatim?

 

[Mark2010]

For sure.

 

[RickStain]

Wouldn't a high percentage of quotes (especially with high school and college athletes) contain the word "umm" scattered throughout if everyone wrote them verbatim?

And lots of commas to indicate pauses.

 

[MisterCreosote]

Wouldn't a high percentage of quotes (especially with high school and college athletes) contain the word "umm" scattered throughout if everyone wrote them verbatim?

A point debated and addressed no fewer than four times in this very thread.

 

[Versatile]

You mean you've scribbled "you know" in your notebook every time you've heard it and never once have you excluded it in a quote you've used? Not buyin' it.

Excluding something from a quote is NOT the same thing as editing a quote.

Mayor Dumb****'s quote: "I fired the city solicitor because, you know, um, he was a dickhead."

My story: Mayor Dumb**** said he fired the city solicitor because "he was a dickhead."

What, exactly, is so wrong or hard about doing that?

Partial quotes like that are terrible. You really need a second or at least a later attribution there.

 

[MisterCreosote]

Your face needs a second or at least a later attribution.

 

[Dick Whitman]

These debates will save journalism, because readers give a damn about what a quote means.

Everyone on this site is stupid except for you.

We get it.

 

[Mizzougrad96]

I can see both sides of the argument, but I can't understand how someone could feel that passionate about it one way or the other.

 

[MisterCreosote]

I can see both sides of the argument, but I can't understand how someone could feel that passionate about it one way or the other.

Assuming you're referring to me, it's because if you "polish" a quote, I have no way of knowing what else you might "polish." I worked in news, and managed teams of reporters for years, and if one of them admitted to editing a quote, I would suspend them right away until I could determine what else, if anything, they may have altered.

But again, I'm not in journalism anymore, having been drummed out years ago. No one is going to lose sleep over what I think of their work.