ESPN.com writer toasted for block-headed mistakes

[imjustagirl]

He also doesn't know understand how these errors could be made.

 

[playthrough]

Everyone who hasn't made a mistake in print or online, please come forward and claim your prize.

What little remaining space on this board that isn't filled by shirtty industry news doesn't need to harp on every faux pas at ESPN. Let's just have some perspective.

 

[waterytart]

I'd consider a change of verb for the thread title since "toast" usually means to honor or compliment.

Indian copy editors

Pleased be to editing you!!

And neither the blogger nor his first commenter knows what "misgivings" means.

Robin Givens, right?

Go to the head of the class, Ben.

 

[Barsuk]

Look who just showed up to the party, guys!

http://construda.blogspot.com/2008/06/commenters-burn-espncom-writer.html?showComment=1214408520000#c6933948255525601277

 

[ondeadline]

The blogger also doesn't know the difference between "re-signed" and "resigned."

 

[SEeditor]

I've read Kevin's stuff in Minnesota for years. Best of luck to him at ESPN.

As for this post, besides the obvious Central Florida-Tulane mishap, maybe it's more of an indicator of how important copy editors and fact-checkers are and not a shot at the writer.

 

[pressmurphy]

Everyone who hasn't made a mistake in print or online, please come forward and claim your prize.

What little remaining space on this board that isn't filled by shirtty industry news doesn't need to harp on every faux pas at ESPN. Let's just have some perspective.

Amen to that. I despise the WWL as much as anyone, but let's not lose sight that mistakes are going to happen when you're processing huge volumes of information every day of the year. Sometimes you have to resign yourself to fixing them and moving on.

 

[Ben_Hecht]

As for this post, besides the obvious Central Florida-Tulane mishap, maybe it's more of an indicator of how important copy editors and fact-checkers are and not a shot at the writer.

A cry in the wilderness, at this point.

They have the money -- but they're clearly not willing to pay solid, well-rounded people the legitimate money required to clean up other people's messes in a competent fashion.

I know fact-checking is a lost art. SI's gone straight to heck in this area, and not even the New Yorker is what it was.

But what happens on ESPN on line ain't right. Not close.

 

[MartinEnigmatica]

The blogger also doesn't know the difference between "re-signed" and "resigned."

Or, apparently, how the name of a popular drug relates to a certain happy emotion. From his self-summary:

"It's my first job since graduating college and I'm estatic to be in the field."

To kind of echo what playthrough said earlier, almost everyone has made an error of some variety. So I don't know why someone starting out in this business would go out of his way to post an error, followed by anonymous spewings aimed at Seifert, who was likely (I don't know the guy) once in the same position this blogger is in now...at the bottom of the sportswriting heap, trying to work his way up.

 

[Ace]

As for this post, besides the obvious Central Florida-Tulane mishap, maybe it's more of an indicator of how important copy editors and fact-checkers are and not a shot at the writer.

A cry in the wilderness, at this point.

They have the money -- but they're clearly not willing to pay solid, well-rounded people the legitimate money required to clean up other people's messes in a competent fashion.

I know fact-checking is a lost art. SI's gone straight to heck in this area, and not even the New Yorker is what it was.

But what happens on ESPN on line ain't right. Not close.

Fact checking is not a lost art. No one has the time.

 

[TheMethod]

I opened this thread expecting to see that this guy falsely accused someone of arson or something. They're a couple errors that shouldn't have been made, but I'm a little surprised at the outpouring of criticism over a couple small errors that didn't even materially affect the point he was making.

 

[beardpuller]

The blogger also doesn't know the difference between "re-signed" and "resigned."

Or, apparently, how the name of a popular drug relates to a certain happy emotion. From his self-summary:

"It's my first job since graduating college and I'm estatic to be in the field."

To kind of echo what playthrough said earlier, almost everyone has made an error of some variety. So I don't know why someone starting out in this business would go out of his way to post an error, followed by anonymous spewings aimed at Seifert, who was likely (I don't know the guy) once in the same position this blogger is in now...at the bottom of the sportswriting heap, trying to work his way up.

To me, this guy's blog and the commentors' vitriol -- all of it speaks to a point I take very seriously, and one I think a lot of Web site wannabes don't understand.
Being a good sports writer is not so much about never making a mistake on an arcane fact. It is about having a facility with the English language. Not knowing what "misgivings" means or that it's "ecstatic," not "estatic," is a way, way, way bigger problem for someone pursuing a writing career than confusing a guy from Central Florida with a guy from Tulane.