Unfortunate for the interviewee; could he use the reporter responsible?
While we’ve all produced the occasional typo (and predictive text doesn’t help), you’d think a news site would have someone proof-reading everything, even if it’s just a case of ‘could you take a quick look at this before I put it online?” (Although the Mail doesn’t seem to have got round to it yet).
I suspect part of the problem is what I have come to call Little Tin God syndrome; a misplaced faith in computers and a subconscious tendency to invest anything seen in type with a spurious authority which makes it less likely that errors will be spotted. A regular experiment with my pupils, asking them to proof-read two essays, one hand-written and one typed, gave them clear evidence of the effect and provided an excellent form of inoculation; perhaps online journalists should try the same thing.
Unfortunate for the interviewee; could he use the reporter responsible?
ReplyDeleteWhile we’ve all produced the occasional typo (and predictive text doesn’t help), you’d think a news site would have someone proof-reading everything, even if it’s just a case of ‘could you take a quick look at this before I put it online?” (Although the Mail doesn’t seem to have got round to it yet).
I suspect part of the problem is what I have come to call Little Tin God syndrome; a misplaced faith in computers and a subconscious tendency to invest anything seen in type with a spurious authority which makes it less likely that errors will be spotted. A regular experiment with my pupils, asking them to proof-read two essays, one hand-written and one typed, gave them clear evidence of the effect and provided an excellent form of inoculation; perhaps online journalists should try the same thing.
"Unfortunate for the interviewee; could he use the reporter responsible?"
ReplyDeleteAlmost certainly!
"...you’d think a news site would have someone proof-reading everything..."
I don't think even the authors scan it over before they press 'send'. Otherwise there'd be fewer of these.