Too Many Unedited Papers

A professor I have this semester (who shall remain nameless) for one of my classes has really started to bug me. No guys, it's not Jean.

For this particular class, we have had several books to read for lecture as well as several assignments to complete for lab. After each book and each assignment, we are supposed to write a 500-word summary of the book, or for lab, a one-page critique of how we thought our assignment went. This comes out to be 10 short papers on top of our other 5, much larger papers.

It gets worse. The end of the semester is approaching. Now we have to take those 5 summaries we wrote on each book and write one big one. His summary of the assignment is "to write what you learned in lecture... 2,500 words." In addition, we must do the same thing for lab... "Write 1,500 words on what you learned in lab."

Here's how I interpret this: My professor wants to hear how great he is by having us kiss up to him in 4,000 words. Did I mention he never grades our summaries and I'm still waiting on grades for 2 of my 5 main assignments? Why should I do my work if he doesn't? And he never leaves comments for the grades I have on the first 3 assignments.

My point to all of this is... does editing matter to him? How much time does he dedicate to making sure we know our stuff compared to how much we are supposed to tell him what an excellent teacher he is? I want to know why I got an 85 on one paper compared to a 100 on the other. Did I have typos or misused facts on the first?

I guess I will never know. This is why it is important to know what mistakes you made and how they need to be corrected; so you can always improve!

Peer Edits Make Me Mad

For this week's blog, I decided to talk about a peer editing experience I had in my Latin American History class. I wrote a paper about Cuba's transition to power from Fidel Castro to his brother, Raul. Last week, we were to hand our paper to the person on the right of us and that person was supposed to type a one-page response with suggestions or issues they had with our writing. First of all, I like to work independtly on my paper and once it's done-- it's done. But okay, I guess I can take some constructive criticism.

So the next week, we get the response back from the other person. I read through it and take it home to make the proper corrections to my paper so I can then hand in the final product. The person reviewing my paper went on this rant for 2 paragraphs about the fact that my paper is about Fidel AND Raul Castro and so I should not refer to either of them by their last name only. Yes, this is a very valid point. However, I went through my paper 3 times and I never, NOT ONCE, made this mistake. I always used their first names to address them.

So this leads me to believe this person never actually read my paper further than the introductory paragraph. All this does is firm up my belief that peer edits are a waste of time, especially in a gen ed class like History 106. I was so angry about this that it made me not even want to read the rest of what she had to say. But I did, and it was all positive encouragement and "oh the rest is perfect". So now, I'm turning in the same paper I handed in a week ago. Peer edits are useless.

Cutting down on editing...not effective.

While this article is troubling for the fact that it sounds like the integrity of print news is vanishing, I can't say that I'm too surprised about this. When papers look at cutting back on staff, I'm sure they first go to the departments that have an abundance of people doing the same job, such as copy editors. They overlook the fact that each one is essential to maintaining the paper's value, integrity and credibility and only see an opportunity to save money. I was shocked to read that the Post-Dispatch went from over 40 copy editors to only 21. That's a bit drastic, I will say.

Papers need to keep in mind that the more errors that get printed, the more readership will fall because each error drops down credibility ratings, even if it's only ever so slightly. It's still a difference. If readership falls, the paper is going to be in the same situation, or worse in terms of finances. And it's sad that they are expecting 21 copy editors to do the work of 40. That's a lot of pressure and those 21 people are probably not even recognized for it.

The New DI Staff

Once students got back from Spring Break, the DI switched over to it's new staff that will work the paper for another year. I learned Wednesday night as I was working that I have a love-hate relationship with this. On the one hand, nobody had a firm grasp on their new position, which made my night drag on longer and longer because I can't do my job until the design desk is finished. And of course, they had the most trouble and thus, the worst delay.

I grew angry knowing I'd be stuck at my desk until all hours of the night, facing a psychology exam the next day that I had not yet started studying for. Finally, the paper dropped. Late, but I'll take it. I stomped all the way home knowing this was going to be how nights at work went for a couple weeks until people got the hang of it and work went smoothly again.

But to my surprise, when I grabbed the paper the next morning, none of my headlines got changed by the slotters. It's a big deal. My headlines always got changed last year. Sometimes for the best, and sometimes for the worst. And it's so frustrating. A lot of the slotters just want to see their words printed to say they wrote that. Well, the new slotters must have either been lazy or unexperienced because all my headlines made final cut.

So while I was exhausted from work, I was happy to see something good came of the night before.

Use it right!

I was facebook creeping as usual (don't judge, you all do it) and I saw a high school friend's page and decided to open it. On it, she posted pictures of her fiance proposing to her. He bought her a house and spelled out his proposal in tea light candles. But he spelled "marry" as "merry". I don't want to sound stuck up, but I'd be soooo mad if that's how I was proposed to. How could he not have taken the time to figure out which "marry/merry" to use? It's just lazy.

Second of all, another person's status said he "was board". Again, it's b-o-r-e-d. Little things like this really take away a person's credibility and it annoys the heck out of me.

I also got a text today from someone that said "are" when they meant to say "our". OK, these are two completely different words with very different meanings.

Why can't people figure this out and take the time to get it right?

Some Professors Need to Learn the Language

I'd like to think that we attend a pretty highly credited University. But every now and again I wonder about that--when I have to correct the grammar and spelling of my own professors.

I was sitting in my Psychology 250 lecture (Personality Psychology) learning about how you can learn a lot about a person from the way his or her office or bedroom looks. My professor then began to talk to us about how social networking Web sites offer the same information. He was using power point slides during his lecture and as he made each of his points, he moved from slide to slide. The title of each slide in this section read: "websites." First of all, you at least know it's in the form of a title, so capitalize it already. Secondly, look it up. It's two words. If I have to be tested on this over and over again, should those people providing me with an education know this stuff too?

Secondly, I was working on a study guide for my Latin American history exam that I took this morning and my professor used the words "examplify" and "towards" in the same sentence. There is no "a" in exemplify and it's toward. No "s". And yet this guy is grading my exam?

Granted, both the professors I have mentioned don't have a strong emphasis of language in their background. But all of the above examples that I gave are quite common words and would give professors a lot more credibility (at least with me) if they took the time to look up the proper usage and spelling before attempting to use them in a sentence or in a lecture.

The DI, but of course...

Something bothers me about the DI and I see it almost every time. It's more of a stylistic issue and it's so easy to fix. Titles of Jumps.

Sometimes they go by last name of the author. Sometimes they go by a key word in the headline. Sometimes they go by the main subject of the story.

Just pick one and stick with it.

For example, the March 3 edition of the DI has jumps titled by subject of story or key word in headline: Burnham, Text, Elections, MTD, and Archaeologists. Usually when you go to find the jump of a story, you look for the subject your reading about.

However, one stands out: Loggins. This is the last name of a diversions columnist who not only got her name in the byline but also the jump. How many people know who Colleen Loggins is off the top of her head? I bet it's limited to co-workers, family and friends. It just makes things difficult for readers to find and is a complete lack of consistency. It's not hard to change the name of the jump to something relevant.

Also, I'd like to point out that her story starts on 6A and jumps to 5A. Smooth move, DI. Real smooth. The readers can now read the end of the story before the beginning. Not that they will have a clue what they are reading because the jump title makes it sounds like we're reading about computer log-ins.

I do get tired about hearing crap about the DI. However, I can't help but join in when there are so many minor mistakes made daily that can easily be fixed. It's hard not point that out sometimes.

Invasive Photos

For the first section of this blog about the photos of the suicide of Dwyer, I personally would not print any of them. I think that things like this are meant to remain within the family of the victim. Some things don't need to go public. However, if I had no choice and had to print one, I'd go with the first (1a). I chose this because it is the least invasive. Furthermore, children that may see this picture will not be scarred from this one unlike 4a. I feel that 1a captures what is going on without getting too invasive. But again, I probably wouldn't print any of them.

As for the second section, all 5 pictures seem very invasive and should be kept private for the sake of the family members of those involved. I can see some gray area, however, with the 5th picture because the woman's face was censored for her identity. However, you still have to take into consideration the identities of the others involved in that action. Perhaps it's something they are not proud of and maybe were too intoxicated at Mardi Gras to make a good judgement. I still think that these photos convey very personal moments and people do not need or want their grief hashed out for public eye. I do not see any circumstances to show the drowned boy and his family or the boy mourning his dog to the public. Furthermore, it's quite gruesome to show the slain worker to the public for fear a child would see it and not respond well.

If these photos were local, you'd run the risk that someone who knew the victim had to find out about his/her death in a photo, rather than an obituary or another proper way. That can cause a lot of turmoil in someone's life.

The one photo that gets me the most is the last one. Yes, her identity is concealed, but it is still an invasive picture that displays much of her body. Also, while what everyone else is doing is quite wrong and they should know better, they may not want their identities displayed in such a photo either. You have to think about everyone involved in the photo and how it would affect each life attached. You also need to think about how necessary it is for this photo to be printed for the sake of the public. Perhaps it is better to use words to describe what happened than just throwing it out there for every eye to gaze at.

Seven Deadly Sins of Copy Editing

After doing a Google search on the term copy editing, I found a decent Poynter article that sums up the roots of the most common errors made by copy editors. It's called The Seven Deadly Copy Editing Sins. In no particular order, those sins are:

1. Arrogance
2. Assumptions
3. Sloppiness
4. Indifference
5. Ignorance
6. Laziness
7. Inflexibility

I found numbers 6 and 7 most interesting. For number 6, I agree completely. It's hard to put in a full effort while copy editing when it's late at night and all you want to do is go home. I've fought that myself at the DI. And it is one of the worst things you can do. I put an article through that had the word "millennium" in the headline, but I let it go with just one "n." Luckily, the slotter caught it and fixed it. The real kicker is that I interned for a company all summer called Millennium Electronics Inc. I should have known that, but I was tired and missed it. And that's a big problem.

Number 7 I don't agree with. The way the article lays it out, they explain this as not being able to rearrange a page. Which, at the DI, I see quite frequently, even close to deadline. However, sometimes copy editors are too flexible, when they over correct articles and inadvertently add errors. They may have too much flexibility with headlines. For instance, we have access to font sizes as copy editors and we can fudge that to make a headline fit if we really want. The downfall is that it messes with the work the design table put into the article and ends up reading great, but looking funny. Sometimes, for copy editors, a little inflexibility never hurt.

The DI: It's not just the copy editors' faults

I wasn't sure if we were supposed to post a new blog or not, but I decided to write one anyway.

The other day I was sitting in class and a couple rows in front of me was a kid reading a copy of the Daily Illini. It happened to be Thursday morning, the day after I copy edit for the DI. I'm assuming he found a mistake because he said "damn copy editors" under his breath. I then took a little bit of offense.

I know we spend a decent chunk of each lab session picking apart the DI. And I'm lucky enough to not have to suffer through it on a paper that I worked on. However, when did it become the copy editors' job to catch everything? Do the writers not have know how to write to get published anymore?

You wouldn't believe some of the things I catch when I'm at work. We all fight over AP stories that come in because those have less errors. But when you've got an article from a staff writer, be prepared. I don't mean to be offensive. A lot of the staff writers are very good writers, but every once in awhile, there's an article so grammatically incorrect that it makes me want to cry.

Also, why does nobody blame the slotters? They're actually the ones with final say in an article. One thing I've noticed at the DI is that the slotters spend more time fixing our headlines than looking at the actual article. And quite frankly, more often than not, the headline the slotter uses to replace mine, I think is worse. But yet a lot of people don't even know what a slotter is, so the blame falls to the copy editor.

Yes, mistakes cover the DI all the time. I realize this. But I wish people would stop singling out one specific role at the DI. If you're going to work for the paper in any way, you need to know grammar, spelling and usage rules. I don't care if you're a designer, night editor, reporter, or copy editor. These are things you should know in your own field. Everyone should share the burden of a mistake.

"Regret the Error"

The Web site I was assigned to look through for this post is Regret The Error.

After scanning through, I found a list composed of "Plagiarism Round-ups" and "The Year in Media Errors and Corrections" dating back to 2004 and as recent as 2008. The media errors links offer a sarcastic tone on mistakes made in the previous year and the corrections to them. For example, President Obama was the target of many errors in 2007, even being referred to as "Osama" in the media.

Another aspect I found handy that I will probably refer to for other classes is the "Accuracy Checklist," located on the homepage of the site. It offers suggestions to improve your work while reporting such as asking the source to spell their name and recording interviews. Then it goes on to offer a list of specific things to look for while editing: numbers, names, titles, locations and definitions, to name a few.

I would suggest, if nothing else, looking at the Accuracy Checklist if you do reporting in any way. It may list obvious things that we should already know to look for, but wouldn't it be worse to miss one of those and make a huge mistake just for someone else to catch? I'd hate to see my name on "The Year in Media Errors and Corrections" link.

Accuracy In Blogging

I think we all know by now not to trust the information we read on any blogging sites in terms of statistics and research. As a freshman, I can remember professors and T.A.s spending a decent chunk of time explaining to the class that most dot-com Web sites should not be trusted. I was told to look for sites that ended in .gov, .org or .edu to credit in research papers.

I found an article that pointed out something interesting. Now, I still don't trust blogs for more than the writer's opinion of a subject, but it made me think. The link to the article is:

http://www.unionsquareventures.com/2007/05/who_do_you_trus.html

Basically, it explains that when false information is published on a blog, it takes mere minutes for people to comment about the accuracy of that information. It shows us that blogs are edited too. The difference is that blogs are edited after they reach the public eye and newspapers are edited prior to reaching the public. Don't get me wrong, who is to say the people commenting on this false information are credible? The point is, who do you trust to edit?