Copy editor/designer, Richmond VA

Seriously, DyePack ... it's time for you to get a new playbook. They hired the best person available for the job.

Redesigns have nothing to do with the drop in circulation across the board --- simply put, a newspaper is just not the best way to get the news anymore, what with TV and the World Wide Whatever version 2.0 --- and your statement that credibility has dropped at every newspaper due to hiring designers as copy editors is simply meaningless hyperbole until you present evidence proving a direct causal link between one and the other. Same goes for your claim about "embarrassing" mistakes --- prove it, using statistical evidence and the scientific method, or shove it.

I'm through here, because I know you can't do any of that.

Congratulations to Chris Wilbers. And ignore the idiot.

 

I will say this -- there's a damn good reason papers are scrounging up copy editors from hither and yon, and it's because no one wants the job. It's pretty damn unsexy. Being a reporter, now that's cool, kids will say.

Add in the fact that folks in my generation never got a good grammar base, and the fact that my peers love playing with cool gadgets such as Photoshop and Illustrator, and it's very easy to see how an editor would hire someone who has more design chops.

I don't know how this all fits into the grand debate, but those are my four cents.

Let me close with this: I doubt Mike would slack off on the copy-editing end of things without knowing the guy could do the job.

 

As I said on another thread to DyePack, I think the Ann Arbor one, just because someone is hired to do two things doesn't mean they do them both on one shift. I know at my paper, we have guys who are copy editor/designers. One night, they're design, doing pages. Another night, they're strictly copy editing. We also have a couple people who only edit copy.

Having two skills doesn't mean you perform them at the expense of each other. Duh.

 

Obviously.

 

You must have missed that Pew study showing a decline in credibility since 1998.

And it just seems fundamental to me that a NEWSpaper would want to, gee, I don't know, focus on the NEWS rather than the appearance of the page.

As far as waiting for any sort of proof, I'm still waiting for the proof that the large amounts of $ spent on redesigns, bulking up design staffs, etc., has led to any increase in readership. During that time, only circulation decreases have been seen.

It's really not that hard to analyze: One group claims to be attracting readers, but readership has declined. Only someone who really didn't want to see the truth would fail to draw the proper conclusion.

 

Seems to me, though, that just as I predicted, the focus from the beginning has been on one area, and that was the area that was cited for the hiring.

This is the same area that claims to boost circulation, but circulation has declined.

It's the same area I cite as hurting credibility and circulation, and circulation has declined.

See that difference? One sentence has a "but." One sentence has an "and."

I'd tack on the "duh," but I think most people can figure this one out -- if they really want to.

 

This time, I was looking for a designer who could also handle editing shifts (different jobs on different nights). Yes, his design skills - which are considerable - got him the job.

Next time, I'll be looking for a copy editor who can also handle design shifts (different jobs on different nights). Yes, the editing skills will get him or her the job.

It isn't that hard. I guess in the ideal world of some, newspapers would be very well edited and everything would be just thrown haphazard on a page.
You need editors.
And you need designers.

 

I guess in the ideal world of many, newspapers would be poorly edited, with a lot of time spent on deciding where things are on a page.