Attention to detail, respect for English language is fading
Copy editing is dead.
It appears to be a casualty of the Internet revolution, which is inexorably killing the print medium. With the continuing decline in revenue from both advertising and circulation, costs must be curtailed. I understand this, even as I lament the demise of my preferred news medium, and am grateful for what continues to exist. At the same time, I am dismayed that there appear to be no or insufficient funds for quality control, either at the Big Newspapers or at ADN. When the Big Newspapers put their copy out on the wire, it gets published as is; no one on staff at the receiving end has time to proofread. Now, one would hope The Washington Post and The New York Times would send out copy they themselves had proofed, but apparently they don't have time for that either. Alert readers may remember the Sept. 9 Washington Post article on the front page of ADN discussing a "… Marine Corps … gender-integrated task force … (at) Camp Lejeune, Natural Carolina …," as well as " the physical and mental stress that continues with combat rolls." Then, on Sept. 17, ADN published The New York Times article discussing the Republican candidate debate, referencing "Gov. Chris Christie of Jersey."
While it is reasonable to expect every worker in every job would do their best to ensure a quality product, whether it be at McDonald's or McDonnell Douglas (Boeing), certain industries can be expected to be held to particularly high standards; these would include medical personnel (one never wants to hear an "oops" from a doctor or nurse), law enforcement, and, in my opinion, the news media. There is a responsibility to ensure information disseminated is, at the very least, correct. At one time, newspapers were often seen as the "final word" on a subject ("If you see it in The Sun, it must be true"). What with the overabundance of news sources at our fingertips, with every conceivable political slant, when anyone can post a blog and anyone else can read and disseminate it, perhaps we should expect less from the established news media; or, perhaps we should expect even more, if the "real" media want to distinguish themselves from the amateurs.
Most readers surely understand that "Natural Carolina" is supposed to be North Carolina, that "rolls" are roles, and that "Jersey" is New Jersey. Even so, when reading the newspaper, one shouldn't have to interpret the text. It is also true that while Natural Carolina does not exist (as far as I know), Jersey does; it's a lovely island in the Gulf of St. Malo off the coast of Brittany. Jersey, along with Guernsey, are commonly referred to as the Channel Islands (not the ones off the coast of California), and are the source of, among other things, Jersey and Guernsey cattle. Jersey does not have a governor, Republican or otherwise. You may now be asking, so what? Who cares? It is sad that many don't; but it might be worthwhile to recall that Orleans, York, Mexico and England are also real places, and were long before they found rejuvenation in this country. Names of places matter. One needn't look any further than our tallest mountain for confirmation of that. The fact that we may not be familiar with them in no way diminishes their importance, and if we dismiss them as trivial or irrelevant, that's on us, and even more so when they are misreported and uncorrected in the media.
-- Ken Landfield
Homer
The views expressed here are the writers' own and are not necessarily endorsed by Alaska Dispatch News, which welcomes a broad range of viewpoints. To submit a letter for consideration, emailletters@alaskadispatch.com, or click here to submit via any web browser. Submitting a letter to the editor constitutes granting permission for it to be edited for clarity, accuracy and brevity. Send longer works of opinion to commentary@alaskadispatch.com.