A horrible day on all fronts ...

The person catching this on deadline has no recourse, because the 10 people who have power to make decisions all went to sleep at 8 and will punt to someone else.

It never should’ve gotten to that point. Advertising sees they’ve sold X ads to the gun show, and someone over there sees the size of the ad ... alarm bells should have gone off.

 

I've been at papers where everyone pretty much glances at the paper proofs, but not the whole pages. Ad reps would scan to make sure their ads were ok and not even look at the first headline or photo. Conversely, editorial side would scan headlines, photos, captions and such, and not even look at the ads.

But, as the publisher stated, "It is against our policy to run gun and other types of controversial advertising on our front page."

Which begs the question, Why was it there to begin with regardless of what stories were on the front page?

 

This. It happens all the time.

That line read and felt to me like just a face-saving, possibly legally advised damage-control step. Were I, say, a shooting victim's family intent on suing for "continued pain and suffering caused", I'd be asking the paper to show me where it says that. And if I were the paper's legal counsel, I'd be trying to dig up proof in the form of possible prior controversial instances where good faith was shown and more sensitivity was shown by following such a policy so as to mitigate any potential damage.

 

Surprised that someone didn't catch that on the desk. The Fort Lauderdale desk. In Chicago.

 

Someone should also be forced to explain WTF this means:

MARLINS V. PHILLIES
Miami's 2-1 Victory
Means Rematch Today

Had Miami lost, would the game have been cancelled?

 

And the centerpiece art is a Parkland memorial. I'd ask WTF were they thinking when they took/placed that ad, but it's obvious no one was thinking.

EDIT for link:

 

They were thinking about $$$. That's all. However much a full-color A-1 ad costs, maybe $25,000 (I have no idea), it was undoubtedly worth an apology. "We're sorry this happened. Excuse me, I have to go to the bank."

 

The ad was colorful, catchy and pretty though, like spring flowers. The yellowish orange was very effective.

 

Considering the entire copy editing/design desk is scheduled to be laid off next month when Chicago takes over production duties, that won't be necessary.

But if they really want to be cruel, they'll yank someone's severance pay over this.

 

Oh, I assume someone not responsible will take the fall.

 

I haven't been in a newsroom in a dozen years, but I actually had no knowledge of what ads were running. My pages would simply have blank boxes on InDesign where the ads would go. The ad desk would later fill in.

 

It really drives home the point of how things have changed, especially at the Sun Sentinel. When I was on the news desk there starting almost 20 years ago, the scrutiny A1 received became a running newsroom joke. At 6 p.m. sharp, at least a dozen editors (I think the record was about 20) would gather around the A1 designer's desk to look at the early version of the page, and of course everyone had to offer his or her opinion before going home, creating an atmosphere of paralysis by analysis. And if the managing editor didn't like it, she'd indicate her displeasure by dropping a few F-bombs, and it was back to the drawing board for the unfortunate designer.

The good thing was that it was highly unlikely such an ad would have slipped past everyone -- but then again, our A1s were ad-free back then (don't recall them making their way onto section fronts there until maybe '05 or '06).