Spellchecker is our friend

sea0tter12 · **Posted:** Sun Jul 20, 2003 8:25 pm

courtesy of the orlando sentinel, in a column about the competitive nature of football in the ACC this coming season ..

"Virginia quarterback Matt Schaub, a fifth-year senior and the ACC's reigning player of the year, said he sees parody within the league."

pzicari · **Posted:** Wed Jul 23, 2003 7:53 pm

Ha. I just corrected "night and shining armor" ... in the slot.

nstockdale · **Posted:** Wed Jul 23, 2003 7:56 pm

And I just read "weekend immune system."[ July 23, 2003: Message edited by: Nicole Stockdale ]

catwoman · **Posted:** Fri Jul 25, 2003 10:30 am

In my perennial efforts to prove to management that our editorial pages need to be copy-edited (yes, that's cq), I've been marking up the published pages. Earlier this week, in addition to our editorializing that Liberia had "morphed" from an obscure country into a hot policy item (no it hasn't, but can't blame that one on spellcheck), we proudly offered Carol Marin's column about Merle Haggard. Not only was she weeks behind the news, but she had to make a trite reference to "Oakie From Muskogie." I think even spellcheck would have known better.

Matthew Grieco · **Posted:** Fri Jul 25, 2003 11:56 am

Your editorial pages aren't copy edited? Who sees them besides the editorial page editor?I shudder. At my erstwhile paper, no page needed more copy editing than the opinion page.

catwoman · **Posted:** Fri Jul 25, 2003 12:36 pm

No kidding. They just slipped through the cracks a couple of slots back. For awhile, the page designer who also did our evening update also would "edit" them. Then the evening update died, and so did the "editing." I've offered for years to add them to my duties on the Perspective section but have gotten two responses: 1) It's already clean enough or 2) What is this, some kind of Power Grab?!The thinking has turned around lately since we ran a crudely drawn editorial cartoon that was widely seen as wildly anti-Semitic. Any copy editor would have questioned it. So I think I'll prevail this time.It's probably a topic for another thread, but my sympathetic boss on Perspective is trying to use this opportunity to create a small desk unto itself that would handle all the Sunday Perspective & editorial stuff. It makes sense because of hours & staffing, and I would be interested in anyone else's opinion on this. Normally, the 6-7 Perspective stories get farmed out to the respective desks depending on the subject, and that gets kind of cumbersome & I'm always begging for copy editing help from some desk or another that's already swamped & sees me as a nuisance.

catwoman · **Posted:** Fri Jul 25, 2003 5:45 pm

Wow, I killed the testy copy editors. Mass die-off from shock?

Wayne Countryman · **Posted:** Fri Jul 25, 2003 6:42 pm

At my paper, a proofreader on the copy desk sometimes receives editorial page proofs at night. Until I saw Catwoman's post, it hadn't occurred to me, who's doing that vacationing proofreader's job this week, that I haven't seen such proofs in months. Sometimes the news desk -- the night editor or his assistant -- checks the proofs. I don't know how often fixes are made -- apparently not often. Not sure that anyone reads the proofs anymore. The situation in Editorial has been fluid for a few years, with news copy editors often filling putting in OT there in the absence of a true copy editor assigned to the department. Perhaps one has been hired at last.As for our Perspective section: A manager has the full-time job of assigning stories and picking them from the wires. He usually writes the column for page 3. He has an assistant who usually writes a story for the section and a roundup of the week's news. One news copy editor, among several in a rotation, works on the section. Other copy editors then read the proofs. Our staffing level being what it is, I can't imagine having a copy editor working on the section full time.

jjmoney62 · **Posted:** Fri Jul 25, 2003 7:06 pm

<blockquote>quote:<hr>Originally posted by Wayne Countryman:
Our staffing level being what it is, I can't imagine having a copy editor working on the section full time.<hr></blockquote>According to Catwoman's bosses, Wayne, your paper is way overstaffed already. Overpaid, too, I hear. And not a little ungrateful ...

jmcg · **Posted:** Fri Jul 25, 2003 8:59 pm

<blockquote>quote:<hr>Originally posted by Wayne Countryman:
At my paper, a proofreader on the copy desk sometimes receives editorial page proofs at night. Until I saw Catwoman's post, it hadn't occurred to me, who's doing that vacationing proofreader's job this week, that I haven't seen such proofs in months. Sometimes the news desk -- the night editor or his assistant -- checks the proofs. I don't know how often fixes are made -- apparently not often. Not sure that anyone reads the proofs anymore. The situation in Editorial has been fluid for a few years, with news copy editors often filling putting in OT there in the absence of a true copy editor assigned to the department. Perhaps one has been hired at last.As for our Perspective section: A manager has the full-time job of assigning stories and picking them from the wires. He usually writes the column for page 3. He has an assistant who usually writes a story for the section and a roundup of the week's news. One news copy editor, among several in a rotation, works on the section. Other copy editors then read the proofs. Our staffing level being what it is, I can't imagine having a copy editor working on the section full time.<hr></blockquote>The Sun has *lots* of editorial writers. Listed right there, on the paper's own Web site, pedigrees and all. They can't help read proofs of their own damn page(s)?

Phillip Blanchard · **Posted:** Fri Jul 25, 2003 10:16 pm

<blockquote>quote:<hr>Originally posted by jmcg:
The Sun has *lots* of editorial writers. Listed right there, on the paper's own Web site, pedigrees and all. They can't help read proofs of their own damn page(s)?<hr></blockquote>You know as well as I do that they aren't trained to look for what editors find.

Wayne Countryman · **Posted:** Sat Jul 26, 2003 4:21 am

<blockquote>quote:<hr>Originally posted by jjmoney62:
According to Catwoman's bosses, Wayne, your paper is way overstaffed already. Overpaid, too, I hear. And not a little ungrateful ...<hr></blockquote>we're "low performers," is what we were told.

jmcg · **Posted:** Sat Jul 26, 2003 2:29 pm

<blockquote>quote:<hr>Originally posted by blanp:
You know as well as I do that they aren't trained to look for what editors find.<hr></blockquote>That I can't dispute, of course. Odd that a paper willing to maintain such a big staff of writers won't put a couple of copy editors on the editorial page staff.[ July 26, 2003: Message edited by: jmcg ]

Wayne Countryman · **Posted:** Sat Jul 26, 2003 3:53 pm

<blockquote>quote:<hr>Originally posted by jmcg:
That I can't dispute, of course. Odd that a paper willing to maintain such a big staff of writers won't put a couple of copy editors on the editorial page staff.<hr></blockquote>let's just say this newspaper enjoys hiring writers.

jmcg · **Posted:** Sat Jul 26, 2003 6:56 pm

<blockquote>quote:<hr>Originally posted by Wayne Countryman:
let's just say this newspaper enjoys hiring writers.<hr></blockquote>And writers who are pretty good, overall, right?
What's with the Chicago crowd's bashing of a paper that seems to me, an occasional but knowledgeable reader of both, to be at the very least as good as the Trib?

Wayne Countryman · **Posted:** Sat Jul 26, 2003 10:25 pm

<blockquote>quote:<hr>Originally posted by jmcg:
And writers who are pretty good, overall, right?
What's with the Chicago crowd's bashing of a paper that seems to me, an occasional but knowledgeable reader of both, to be at the very least as good as the Trib?<hr></blockquote>many good, or better, writers; many others keep the copy desk busy.as for the bashing: follow the money.[ July 27, 2003: Message edited by: Wayne Countryman ]

catwoman · **Posted:** Sun Jul 27, 2003 4:27 am

And by Chicago crowd you mean management? I have a "Miner's Daughter" sign strung across my cubicle just in case anyone gets the idea that it would be a good idea to expand my horizons with an expenses-paid jaunt to, say, baltimore.

Wayne Countryman · **Posted:** Sun Jul 27, 2003 5:16 pm

<blockquote>quote:<hr>Originally posted by catwoman:
And by Chicago crowd you mean management? I have a "Miner's Daughter" sign strung across my cubicle just in case anyone gets the idea that it would be a good idea to expand my horizons with an expenses-paid jaunt to, say, baltimore.<hr></blockquote>On behalf of the Baltimore slackers, allow me to assure you, Catwoman, that we see a difference between the Chicago Tribune and Tribune Publishing Co. We appreciate that not every Chicago Tribune manager jumped at the chance to curry favor at our expense during the contract "negotiations."We'd also like to think that the oral bashing by Tribune Publishing was merely a ploy in its beatdown strategy, which was precisely scripted and delivered.

jmcg · **Posted:** Sun Jul 27, 2003 5:48 pm

Amazing to think how much better all these papers would be if the owners and the bosses didn't make such a sustained and concerted effort to piss off the very people -- writers, editors, etc. -- on whom they depend to put out those papers in the first place.

Wayne Countryman · **Posted:** Sun Jul 27, 2003 6:45 pm

<blockquote>quote:<hr>Originally posted by jmcg:
Amazing to think how much better all these papers would be if the owners and the bosses didn't make such a sustained and concerted effort to piss off the very people -- writers, editors, etc. -- on whom they depend to put out those papers in the first place.<hr></blockquote>The owners and bosses have a different idea of what "better" is than we do.We in Baltimore were told that we should emulate the Indianapolis Star, which isn't a Tribune paper but near enough to corporate HQ to stand out as "high-performing." What separates the Sun and the Star, it seems, is that the Star pays according to "performance." The Sun has been held back by slackers being paid too much. So, we're told, it's for our own good that we got a pay freeze, the end of matching for our 401(k) plan and the dissolution of our pension plan in exchange for the opportunity to buy stock in our beloved Trib, belong to a more-limited 401(k) plan and encouragement to back-stab co-workers and suck up to management for any future raises. What was the original point of this thread?

jmcg · **Posted:** Sun Jul 27, 2003 10:42 pm

<blockquote>quote:<hr>Originally posted by Wayne Countryman:

What was the original point of this thread?<hr></blockquote>Something not nearly as interesting, at least not to me. (Apologies to Seaotter.)[ July 27, 2003: Message edited by: jmcg ]

tommangan · **Posted:** Tue Jul 29, 2003 2:20 am

<blockquote>quote:<hr>So, we're told, it's for our own good that we got a pay freeze, the end of matching for our 401(k) plan and the dissolution of our pension plan in exchange for the opportunity to buy stock in our beloved Trib, belong to a more-limited 401(k) plan and encouragement to back-stab co-workers and suck up to management for any future raises. <hr></blockquote>I'd have gone on strike before giving all that back. For god's sake it's a onepaper town, it's impossible to lose money in that kind of market.

Wayne Countryman · **Posted:** Tue Jul 29, 2003 3:09 am

<blockquote>quote:<hr>Originally posted by tom mangan:
I'd have gone on strike before giving all that back. For god's sake it's a onepaper town, it's impossible to lose money in that kind of market.<hr></blockquote>Tribune Co. didn't swallow up the Times Mirror chain to get the Baltimore Sun, a paper that needs to spend more than most its size because it competes with the Washington Post for suburban circulation and advertising. Sure, we turn a profit, but with stockholders to satisfy and million-dollar salaries and bonuses to pay in Chicago HQ, saving nickels and dimes in the hinterlands is important.Tribune Co. would rather have turned the paper into a shopper than give union members close to what a strike would have cost members. The paper would have been weakened for years -- perhaps forever -- by the kind of strike necessary to stand up to Tribune. Frustrated Guild members discussed guerrilla tactics but chose to take the high road ("not another Detroit") before accepting the contract. There was more support for striking out of principle than out of hope of getting a better contract. Guess you had to be here.In 1984 I was beaten with brass knuckles in my car while the mugger's jittery accomplice stood watch, patting what probably was a gun in his waistband. These "negotiations" were the closest I've felt to that sensation -- worse, because of the buildup and frustration, than taking on a burglar or looking down the barrel of a trembling cop's gun.

tommangan · **Posted:** Tue Jul 29, 2003 9:42 am

Wayne: I hope I would've had enough nerve to vote for a strike anyway. Taking away your pension with no 401k match is untenable to me. I mean, it's just brutal, punishing you for being in the union, to pull such shit. Maybe it'll happen to us all some day, but I don't like thinking about it.

Wayne Countryman · **Posted:** Tue Jul 29, 2003 2:28 pm

<blockquote>quote:<hr>Originally posted by tom mangan:
Wayne: I hope I would've had enough nerve to vote for a strike anyway. Taking away your pension with no 401k match is untenable to me. I mean, it's just brutal, punishing you for being in the union, to pull such shit. Maybe it'll happen to us all some day, but I don't like thinking about it.<hr></blockquote>Eventually we'll be eligible for a Tribune pension plan and a 401(k) with a form of matching, though not as good for most individuals as what we had before this contract. No strike would have improved this; if anything, the corporation would have made the contract worse as further punishment. Or fired us, which is another matter. Hence, the feeling of hopeless.Other chains are going in this direction. Tribune kept throwing in our face that the Washington Post chapter of our union accepted certain things last year; Tribune kept saying we must do the same. Of course, when we said we wanted certain provisions of the Post contract, or all of it, that was rejected. I fear this sort of pummeling will hit newspapers across the country. Concessions are the trend. There was a time when you could vote with your feet. With ownership of papers concentrated in fewer hands, Wall Street demanding ever-higher profit margins and workers largely unorganized, we're outgunned. Anyone worried about their staff's "professional" status costing it OT pay? That plan is alive in Congress. If passed, we'll work longer hours for the same pay, and see staffs shrink.

Testy Copy Editors

Spellchecker is our friend

Who is online

What They're Saying

Useful Links