Hundreds of papers use AP unedited ...

Phillip Blanchard · **Posted:** Tue Oct 07, 2003 7:43 am

LOS ANGELES -- Whether he'll become governor of California is still to be determined, but if he does, a professional hand analyst who examined Arnold Schwarzenegger's palm print at Grauman's Chinese Theatre said she sees "tremendous leadership ability." *** ... but, for a change, it looks like this was too much for a lot of them. Not Newsday, though.***[ October 07, 2003: Message edited by: blanp ]

Phillip Blanchard · **Posted:** Wed Oct 08, 2003 3:53 am

SPOKANE, Wash. (AP) - Call it "Artist Eye on the Farm Guy."***No.***

Bakelite · **Posted:** Wed Oct 08, 2003 12:49 pm

Like hundreds of other news Web sites, including mine, Newsday.com takes advantage of its endless news hole by shoveling up the AP wire online completely unedited.That doesn't mean that it shouldn't be edited in print editions.

Phillip Blanchard · **Posted:** Wed Oct 08, 2003 1:25 pm

<blockquote>quote:<hr>Originally posted by Dean Betz:

That doesn't mean that it shouldn't be edited in print editions.<hr></blockquote>Surely you're not suggesting that it's OK not to edit for the Web or, at least, exercise judgment in story selection.

Bakelite · **Posted:** Wed Oct 08, 2003 2:33 pm

<blockquote>quote:<hr>Originally posted by blanp:
Surely you're not suggesting that it's OK not to edit for the Web or, at least, exercise judgment in story selection.<hr></blockquote>Of course I'm not. In addition to our presentation of the AP feed in its naked form, we apply all kinds of editing, organization and judgement to it, just like our print brethern. The only difference is that we shovel up the feed wholesale, as well.

Phillip Blanchard · **Posted:** Wed Oct 08, 2003 3:07 pm

<blockquote>quote:<hr>Originally posted by Dean Betz:
Of course I'm not. In addition to our presentation of the AP feed in its naked form, we apply all kinds of editing, organization and judgement to it, just like our print brethern. The only difference is that we shovel up the feed wholesale, as well.<hr></blockquote>Why do that?

Bakelite · **Posted:** Wed Oct 08, 2003 7:56 pm

<blockquote>quote:<hr>Originally posted by blanp:
Why do that?<hr></blockquote>It allows us to provide a lot of information very quickly. It's one of the ways the people can choose to get news -- filtered through a newspaper, interpreted by bloggers, raw from the AP, hell, we'll even let them read press releases if they want.

Phillip Blanchard · **Posted:** Wed Oct 08, 2003 8:33 pm

<blockquote>quote:<hr>Originally posted by Dean Betz:
It allows us to provide a lot of information very quickly. It's one of the ways the people can choose to get news -- filtered through a newspaper, interpreted by bloggers, raw from the AP, hell, we'll even let them read press releases if they want.<hr></blockquote>If news stories are unedited, readers have no reason to choose one newspaper--or Web site--over another. But we all know that.

Bakelite · **Posted:** Wed Oct 08, 2003 10:01 pm

<blockquote>quote:<hr>Originally posted by blanp:
If news stories are unedited, readers have no reason to choose one newspaper--or Web site--over another. But we all know that.<hr></blockquote>I guess I don't get your point. We have yesterday's polished news and today's raw news, which is a little bit rougher. Our readers find that mix to be pretty useful.

Phillip Blanchard · **Posted:** Wed Oct 08, 2003 10:10 pm

<blockquote>quote:<hr>Originally posted by Dean Betz:
I guess I don't get your point. We have yesterday's polished news and today's raw news, which is a little bit rougher. Our readers find that mix to be pretty useful.<hr></blockquote>Take the AP story that began this thread. Putting it in the paper or on the Web site serves no useful purpose.
It's not our job to give readers a choice between "raw" and "polished" news. It's our job to edit what we publish.

Phillip Blanchard · **Posted:** Wed Oct 08, 2003 10:11 pm

And you know it. You're being deliberately provocative.

Bakelite · **Posted:** Wed Oct 08, 2003 10:49 pm

<blockquote>quote:<hr>Originally posted by blanp:
It's not our job to give readers a choice between "raw" and "polished" news. It's our job to edit what we publish.<hr></blockquote>Part of my job is to give readers the ability to see today's news as soon as we get it, if they so choose. That news is not as well prepared as yesterday's news from our papers, which readers can also choose. We have room for both, and readers are interested in both.I agree that this AP story had little merit, but most of the rest of them today were worthwhile.[ October 08, 2003: Message edited by: Dean Betz ]

Phillip Blanchard · **Posted:** Wed Oct 08, 2003 11:34 pm

I'm not picking on your outfit, which is better than most. But unedited wire copy might as well be fiction.

Rio · **Posted:** Thu Oct 09, 2003 12:34 am

<blockquote>quote:<hr>Originally posted by blanp:
I'm not picking on your outfit, which is better than most. But unedited wire copy might as well be fiction.<hr></blockquote>Interesting points on both sides, but I have to give the edge to Dean on this one. Raw AP copy may be crap at times, but saying it "might as well be fiction" is a little harsh. Having it on the Web site gives the reader another reason to go the newpaper's site.Besides, Phil, the Washington Post may have round-the-clock copy editors to take care of online AP copy, but most of us don't. :>

Phillip Blanchard · **Posted:** Thu Oct 09, 2003 12:40 am

To my knowledge, Washingtonpost.com does not have such editors.

Bakelite · **Posted:** Thu Oct 09, 2003 6:12 am

<blockquote>quote:<hr>Originally posted by blanp:
To my knowledge, Washingtonpost.com does not have such editors.<hr></blockquote>I'll bet dollars to donuts, as someone used to say, that this same AP story about the "professional hand analyst" appeared on Washingtonpost.com and NYTimes.com, just as it appeared on Newsday.com and NJ.com.

ADKbrown · **Posted:** Thu Oct 09, 2003 7:50 am

I have to side with Dean on this, too. I see no harm in providing the public access to raw wire copy.

tim · **Posted:** Thu Oct 09, 2003 8:12 am

<blockquote>quote:<hr>Originally posted by Dean Betz:
I'll bet dollars to donuts, as someone used to say, that this same AP story about the "professional hand analyst" appeared on Washingtonpost.com and NYTimes.com, just as it appeared on Newsday.com and NJ.com.<hr></blockquote>You win.

jjmoney62 · **Posted:** Thu Oct 09, 2003 8:54 am

Someone has to be on blanp's side here.Let AP post its own raw copy on its own Web site. Why would a newspaper be compelled to do so on its own site, under its own proud banner, when it wouldn't in its own paper? Or, conversely, why edit ANYTHING you put on the Web? Or in your paper for that matter? Let the people decide where the commas go and what is libel, what's true and what's not ....

Bakelite · **Posted:** Thu Oct 09, 2003 9:33 am

Whether we agree or disagree on a fine point of journalism, I'm always on blanp's side.

tommangan · **Posted:** Thu Oct 09, 2003 10:52 am

I'm being dragged (kicking and screaming) to the conclusion that the Web is in more like TV or Radio in the sense that its audience prizes immediacy above all else... the record can be corrected along the way but the main thing is to get the news out there. What I've learned from all my Web sites is that Web users are typically into quick hits ... they tend not to click on extra links for further depth ... they spend an average of less than a minute on any given page ... It seems crazy to post AP copy unedited but keep in mind that stuff is constantly being updated with new facts and the old stuff is collecting digital dust somewhere. Other side of the coin is that often, incorrect stuff can stay online for years. The Web is a marketplace of ideas in action and it's often messy as hell.

Phillip Blanchard · **Posted:** Thu Oct 09, 2003 1:59 pm

<blockquote>quote:<hr>Originally posted by Tim Hathcock:
You win.<hr></blockquote>I'm frankly stunned that my colleagues at Washingtonpost.com don't follow my dictates. Heads will roll!

majorbabs · **Posted:** Thu Oct 09, 2003 5:18 pm

You read a newspaper to get a decently-written, accurate and (please) well-edited newspaper story. You should NOT get unedited wire copy. However, the Web site can run unedted wire copy as long as the reader knows that's what it is.Too many readers will not know the difference -- or even know that there is a difference -- and choose not to read the better story in the have-to-pay-for newspaper because they got it free on the Web site. My two and a half cents.

Testy Copy Editors

Hundreds of papers use AP unedited ...

Who is online

What They're Saying

Useful Links