Mark Whicker, what were you thinking?

The way I read the editorial apology, it sounds like that was at least part of what happened, but that the concerns didn't get up to a level with enough authority to spike the column before it went up/on the press.

As a young editor, I appreciate the robust discussion on the subject. For me, it's kind of comparing apples and oranges (or Orange County Registers?), but two observations come to mind.

One, my first boss, would have instantly killed this with a two-word epitaph. "Not sports." I know he wants to cross platforms and tie things together, but sometimes the KISS (Keep It Simple, Stupid) method works best. You're in Southern California, for cripes sakes. You can't tell me that there's not an interesting prep story, or something about the Angels or something, anything to write about other than touching this third rail.

The other thing that comes to mind, and maybe it's a thing with a big columnist or a big staff, but no one knew he was writing about Jayce Dugard before this column landed in the copy queue? The communication lines should be open enough that the SE or some higher-up has at least a clue he's going to go there. I'm not saying it should have been pre-approved, but like a plane with no gear coming into the runway, if he's going to write about a child rape victim in a sports column, someone ought to know about it ahead of time.

 

drip,

I don't know, maybe you thought the column wasn't that bad....but I guarantee that people won't be forgetting about the atrocity of it in a couple of weeks. He basically, maliciously or not, made fun of a girl's rape and captivity for 18 years. That's kind of hard to forget.

 

I don't think I would like your first boss.

I think it's very likely that no one knew what Whicker was planning to file on a Labor Day Monday. It's not like they have to schedule photos or graphics or anything.

 

Things change, and I don't know what the current culture is. But in our overlap, he was very fast, non-deadline columns were in before the desk arrived and you could edit him (although you had to run changes past him). Also, he used to file a month of column topics at a time that, obviously, would change when news dictated but meant he was never stuck for an idea on a given day.

As for spiking columns, I've done it, but I wouldn't spike a rookie preps writer's 10-inch volleyball game story without clearance from the SE. Simply because an SE usually doesn't want to be ambushed by an angry writer camped outside his office in the morning.

 

Am I missing something here Frank? Are you saying you would spike a column but not a prep story?

 

Drip, he's saying he wouldn't spike even the most inconsequential story without checking with the SE first.

 

He's saying he has spiked a column before, but that it can't/shouldn't be done without going through the proper chain of command, even if it's just a 10-inch prep volleyball story by an unknown writer.

That said, I don't think anybody is suggesting that killing a column is such an easy thing to do -- only that that's what needed to be done in this case if there were to be no changes made, either by copy editors or else, the writer.

 

OK. Spiking anyone's story, column or what have you, is not easy. And checking with those in charge is the proper channel to go through.
Somehow, several people fell asleep on Whicker's column and this is the result, a fiasco.

 

I honestly think that the thought process involved was something similar to this:

"Sports ... Sports ... Sports ... Sports ... 'Wow! 18 years!' ... Sports ... Sports ... Sports ... Sports ..."

Hopefully, this will remind columnists, SEs and deskers that anytime sports is linked to something that isn't sports related; think. Then, think again.

Real life isn't very often a sport and has to be treated much differently.

 

Right, and that's the thing for which the editor took responsibility. This was a convergence of problems, a systemic breakdown that prevented from happening any of the things that needed to happen: the back-up of a writer who needed it, or, in lieu of that, the stoppage of a story that needed it.

These were mistakes of omission -- often the hardest, least obvious and most esoteric ones to dealt with -- because it was what Whicker didn't/couldn't see, himself, that started the collapse, and the lack of recognition and/or enough action by those who came after him on the column that compounded the problem.

This might have been caught and stopped at any point along the way. It wasn't, so this is what happens.

 

I disagree with this 100 percent. Things blow over, no matter what the subject matter is. He'll follow up with a really good piece, and most readers will chalk his mistake up to exactly that - a mistake. Again, it really didn't offend me all that much, but I don't have a soul. I can see where it offended some (actually, I made the Mrs. read it, and she was none too pleased), but I say thing whole thing blows over in a week, and slowly disappears from the message board.

 

Presented without comment: the AV Club weighs in.

http://www.avclub.com/articles/daily-buzzkills-check-out-the-rape-victim-hook-whi,32759/