Who needs copy editors?

You might've won a Pulitzer for commentary if you'd let it go.

 

It's very likely a copy editor typed the f word into that story.

 

Yeah, it looks to me like this was on purpose. I heard it happened in a Gannett regional editing center. Anybody have the 411 on that?

 

No. Alleged is a weasel-word when a reporter is lazy and doesn't specify who is making accusations or the legal status of a case.

 

Would have been even better if it said, "Fuck you Gannett" or "Fuck you Craig Dubow".

 

Um, what kind of copy editor do you expect to get for $10K a year? Just asking?

 

You don't need as many copy editors as writers for a website.

The infuriating thing about Grantland's mistakes is that three or four good copy editors could eliminate so many of them.

 

No, I wasn't suggesting paying copy editors $10,000 (although I am ancient enough that my first copy editing salary was $9,680) -- rather that the writers' collective salary cuts, if they proved sloppier than expected, would combine to finance the hiring of more copy editors. I suppose the fact I was apparently unclear to some people is proof that everyone needs editing, including me.

Nevertheless, on a small startup, I would elect to spend the money on the most (and best) writers I could get rather than a slew of people people to fix their crap. In a perfect world, I would have plenty of both, but in an imperfect world I would staff much more heavily on the gathering and writing of the content. I have worked with a bunch of people who needed minimal editing, which is not to say they never needed editing, just that they seldom needed heavy editing. And I've worked with a bunch of people who turned in very sloppy copy because they had little incentive to clean it up since the desk did it for them -- newspapers, especially big ones, have been ridiculously lenient on that far too often. Often the situation exists only because newspaper management has allowed it to continue.

 

My paper is tremendously guilty of this. A very unhealthy situation, and not just on the printed page.

 

This is part of a conversation I had some time ago. I'm pretty sure it took at least a couple of years off my life ...

Me: You used RBI as plural all throughout your story.
Writer: Yes.
Me: That's incorrect. The plural of RBI is RBIs.
Writer: I know. I like my way better.
Me: So, you knew it was wrong and did it anyway?
Writer: So the copy desk fixes it. That's their job. What's the big deal?

 

Actually, the plural of RBI is RBI. 8) [/ohnoesnotthisshitagain]