-
Website
http://www.pressgazette.co.uk/ -
Original page
http://www.pressgazette.co.uk/story.asp?sectioncode=1&storycode=43078&c=1 -
Subscribe
All Comments -
Community
-
-
Top Commenters
-
Popular Threads
All Comments
Sub-editors spending time to do things like find links to other stories to place within the body of on-line articles, adding semantic richness to news articles to enable "mashups" to better understand stories and therefore increase findability, adding external tools from elsewhere to increase the interaction of readers with the newspaper- these all help news web sites attract and retain audiences, but detract from the core activity of finding and writing news.
Oh, there's always checking for mistakes, which seems to be considered less and less important as time goes by. If you make a mistake on a website, many people don't consider that it's often syndicated out to many places before you've had a chance to correct it, and may end up in Google indexes and other such places.
http://fallingoffablog.typepad.com/falling_off_...
The key bit, I think, is this: "One of the challenges now is to help today's magazine production staff to make the transition to these new online roles. For publishers, it will take a commitment to providing the training and the space to lean these new skills. For production desk staff it will take a genuine willingness to re-learn their craft, sometimes giving up cherished roles and practices."
Within 3 years, newspapers as we know them in the regions will be dead, closed.
Within 5 years new newspapers will arise from the ashes, modern newspapers with traditional values with local reporters and photographers, lots of local news. local advertising at 'reasonable' rates.
The one thing that the Internet does badly is local news. Newspaper proprietors can't see that, and it's so obvious. They all (still) have their noses in the trough, looking only for their next bonus, and can't see that most of them have a local monopoly on local news, but have decided that the future is online, video, blogging, Facebook, texting and all sorts of other bollocks.
It's not, never will be, but leave them on their merry way to the fires of hell, and then good, honest local entrepreneurs (many of them ex-journalists), will take their opportunity and lead the way into a new golden age of local newspaper journalism
Remember, the darkest part of the night is before the dawn, and we're not too far from sunrise.
All we can do is show that we are using the net to break out of our former parochial ways. We use google to put up a world map and we have had a hundred or so ex-pats flagging -up where they are in the world and posting pix and info, with more going up each week.
Every time we put up pics/video of local snow a "reader" in Canada sends us in a pic saying "no, this is what I call snow..." So we are still generating content that interests local people, even if it isn't local in itself.
The net is still under resourced, but success with the stats, wherever it comes from, means we are slowly getting more support. Next month we get a full-time web editor on the back of it.
All the journalists can do is to keep up the momentum and wait for the commercial people to catch-up.
What I am saying is that I know of no comprehensive content-driven news website at a national, regional or local level that has ever made a real profit once production costs (journalists) are taken into account.
Subscription simply won't work - why would I pay for something when the best news website in the world (bbc.co.uk/news) is free and always will be - and advertising is not going to reach the levels online required to cover costs let alone make profits.
It's not as though the net is new. It's been around a long time now but still no workable commercial business model for real news websites.
The blaze has had a serious effect on most artillery roads in the area.
He shouted racist abuse and treats
full-proof method
The area outside the Replay and G-Star shops was condoned off late into the evening
The noise is unbareable
51 palette had already been exported to the UK
THESE pictures give Corrie fans a sneaky peak at Molly and Tyrone’s wedding
“Apparently someone was around last week doing a bit of a wrecky
with donations to Arthritic Research
Just how long ago did Roy work on a provincial evening newspaper? He doesn't seem to have the first idea about what subs do.
Note to JP: Journalists sold their souls when they rolled over for Murdoch and became writers/printers on the move to Wapping. Writers/subs/printers was the next inevitable step. The journalist of tomorrow will write, sub, web-create and market. Oh yes, and make the tea.
http://www.guardian.co.uk/media/greenslade
Note please what Dominic Ponsford wrote above, about economic reality. There is a commercial compulsion involved as well as my genuine belief that skilled reporters need only one pair of extra eyes to see their copy before it is published.
Note also that the error people pointed out in Amos's excellent report was so minor that it mattered not one bit to the substantive issue (and sub-editors make typos as well as reporters).
http://www.guardian.co.uk/media/greenslade
Note please what Dominic Ponsford wrote above, about economic reality. There is a commercial compulsion involved as well as my genuine belief that skilled reporters need only one pair of extra eyes to see their copy before it is published.
Note also that the error people pointed out in Amos's excellent report was so minor that it mattered not one bit to the substantive issue (and sub-editors make typos as well as reporters).
I mean, how many years have all of you subs spent making the same corrections to the same reporters' copy, and the reporters don’t even notice what you're doing?!
The hard fact is the current business model for newspapers is on the way out and the cutting is going to continue until a web-based model is established.
You obviously can't cut all the reporters, (though some groups seem intent on experimenting around the fringes of this possibility), marketing and promotions generally add a few percent to sales so are untouchable (for now), advertising sales team are already frequently outsourced to agencies and will only be cut when there isn’t enough advertising to merit their numbers, and as far as I can see, the photographers are all pretty much gone or outsourced.
We're next in line.
Ranting at Greenslade won't change that - better instead learn some new skills. Remember the hot metal men? Gone. I worked with a gentleman who used to set type and his value as an employee was wiped out as page layout software developed. Of his 20+ colleagues only three were retrained in the new technology.
So, stop wasting your time ranting at Greenslade, and hurry up and learn a bit of HTML, Photoshop, Dreamweaver, search engine optimisation etc, etc, because being able to sculpt a cunning headline, deliver a punchy intro, spot a legal at 100 yards and sub a 1,000-word legal report into three pars doesn't cut it anymore.
You're running out of time.
I don't think Greenslade has a worthwhile point to make either, but the way you argue it is pathetic.
I am sure he said "that" and I am sure a sub would have corrected it.
I too write direct to web - un-subbed. I make as many errors as you and Greenslade do.
It wouldn't be a story about subbing without a subbing error.
This piece was subbed - but rather late last night.
In the interests of transparency - we don't have subs on www.pressgazette.co.uk but we do have a policy of making sure nothing goes up without another member of the editorial team checking it for errors. Not as good as having dedicated sub-editors - but a consequence of the economic reality we live in.
All human beings make mistakes - and I have yet to come across the journalist who is able to file flawless copy every time. I think it is also true that it is almost impossible to sub your own work - because you often just can't see your own errors for some reason.
But as a self-published author myself, I would be fascinated to hear how Facebook can improve a writer's marketing effort. Please tell me more.
Best wsiehs
Tony Boullemier
LOL
Greenslade is so far removed from grass-roots journalism that not only is his head in the clouds, but so is another part of his anatomy from which he spouts this rubbish
It costs twice as much.
Alas, Roy is spot on.
And I speak with a very real interest; my wife's a provincial newspaper sub.
I will always thank the Times sub who questioned a rugby report I had written that mentioned the Argentine scrumhalf Augusto Pinochet..it should, of course, have been Augustin Pichot.
My thanks to all subs...
I mean, how many years have all of you subs spent making the same corrections to the same reporters' copy, and the reporters don't even notice what you're doing?!
The hard fact is the current business model for newspapers is on the way out and the cutting is going to continue until a web-based model is established.
You obviously can't cut all the reporters, (though some groups seem intent on experimenting around the fringes of this possibility), marketing and promotions generally add a few percent to sales so are untouchable (for now), advertising sales team are already frequently outsourced to agencies and will only be cut when there isn't enough advertising to merit their numbers, and as far as I can see, the photographers are all pretty much gone.
We're next in line.
Ranting at Greenslade won't change that - better instead learn some new skills. Remember the hot lead men? Gone. I worked with a fella who used to set type and his value as an employee was wiped out as page layout software developed. Of his 20+ colleagues only three were retrained in the new technology.
So, stop wasting your time ranting at Greenslade, and hurry up and learn a bit of HTML, Photoshop, Dreamweaver, search engine optimisation etc, etc, because being able to sculpt a cunning headline, deliver a punchy intro, spot a legal at 100 yards and sub a 1,000-word legal report into three pars doesn't cut it anymore.
You're running out of time.
He is either woefully out of touch or delusional. Reporting staff levels are critically low, which is why 95% of the copy in all our national newspapers is exactly the same, pulled off the same agency wires. Maybe Greenslade thinks that AP and PA copy can slot straight onto a page without subbing?
I'm fed up hearing how the internet is the biggest threat facing newspapers. The biggest threat to newspapers is the incompetent accountants and snake-oil salesmen who are running them, who think that journalists, be they reporters or subs, are an optional luxury they can do without. And shame on the senior editorial staff who have been complicit in the systematic dismantling of our industry, while feathering their own nests.
You see - what I wrote wasn't checked by another sub. I rest my case, your honour!!!!
Shurely shome mishtake?
Yes, let's all lose our jobs.
Good thinking Roy.
What a genius.
Let's lose the layer that is Roy Greenslade.
Have I spelt that right? Who cares?
You're all doomed...doomed I tell ye.
When I came into Fleet Street there were dockers. Gone. Compositors. Gone. Linotype men. Gone. Motor manufacturers. Gone. Lightermen. Gone. Bankers (unfortunately still with us). Why should newspapermen be so arrogant to think that they are bullet-proof? Our old trade is on its last legs. We must now all explore new ways to communicate ... and the internet to us should be like the oceans facing Columbus. Get out there and conquer new territory.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/newstopics/poli...
Murder victim rises from the dead? Only on planet Barclay.
And note the Google-baiting headline, dull, completely devoid of inspiration, demonstrating how newspapers like the Hellograph think people rely on machines to decide what they read these days, rather than executing judgement.
And Roy's link seems to be pointing to a blog post about libel payouts in Ieland - a piece of satire, perhaps?
Top man!
What happens when the reporters have gone home and they've done their job, or should they be constantly glued to laptops, 24-hour news channels and study?
Most provincial reporters are undoubtedly talented. But subbing isn't just spellers and templates!! A good sub respects good copy, pictures and ideas, using all to their optimum.
Think of it this way, although many could argue journalism isn't surgery (quite rightly) you wouldn't expect a guy designing a new scalpel to hand it straight to a surgeon without the BMA testing it first, would you?
Defamation could cut deeper in certain cases. Inaccuracies could be embarrassment to the hilt for some. Not to mention the simple laughing stock scenario when a populous spots references to a locality/venue/councillor/MP incorrectly bracketed for a certain area - as could be the potential for outsourced subbing. Oh, yeah, and house style and layout (some provincials take care to design attractive pages - not just the nationals like the Sun). But I guess that doesn't matter any more. We're all, as they say, 'metro-sexuals' now, easy come, easy go. Like the bit on my sleeve where I just wiped my nose. I call it the greenslide. Can't think of a word that inspired me. Can you?
Get real Greenslade.
Oi, Gavin Powers, stop wasting your beautiful prose on 'comments' and get earning with words that you obviously find easy to pluck from the air. It's pointless aiming your anger at Roy Greenslade. He is only the messenger.
This would give us the chance to have a constructive discussion rather than simply boost Roy's blog rankings, which I sometimes suspect is the real object of the exercise ;-)
And Norman, Julie still can write most people under the table - doubtless soon to be labelled another unnecessary skill – and is still very much a Spur. I'll pass on your comments.
As I self-published author myself I am fascinated to hear that Facebook can improve your marketing. Please tell me more!
Very best wishes
Tony Boullemier
Respect to Norman Giller. He mastered the old way and is now championing the new. But he's also saying we are not going to get anywhere by moaning. We should all still aim for good journalism. you don't have to wallow in a downward spiral of poor pay and turning around press releases. I have a colleague who has gone from trainee to editor in three and a half years. There is still hope. Good journalists can still get on. Having said that, Roy has gone too far on this one - by saying Sun subs are a different breed and the rest can go hang, he's done us all down. I understand his commercial point, but not the way he makes it.
Blogging - opinion based - might be one element of modern editorial for which, just about, you might not need a sub-editor. But even that really needs a second eye. (Not that blogging is proper journalism. Anyone can have an opinion. It takes proper work to seek out facts.)
However, when it comes to trainee reporters who cannot even spell the road name opposite their office correctly, or who leave in basic contempt of court or libel, reports definitely need a second eye.
Modern trainees - and some experienced or national newspaper journalists - think they can look everything up on the internet, but forget that any idiot can post anything on the web, Mr Greenslade clearly being one. There are no substitutes for original sources.
Mr Greenslade, spend a week on a local paper actually going out and reporting. Then you would soon appreciate a critical eye going over your work, before it goes to print. The rush reporters get from newsgathering can often cause them to err.
There are some famous national newspaper hacks who can gather information but not string it together coherently - and others who don't get their basic facts right. I have been a national newspaper sub-editor and if certain reporters were spelling MY name, I'd be double checking it!
http://tinyurl.com/bv938q
Our seasoned news editor of 30-odd years' experience writes at best very badly, at worst incomprehensible gibberish. And that's no exaggeration. Our best reporter writes very well but sadly fails to grasp the correct use of either hyphens or commas.
And when, through necessity, copy appears unchecked online, we're deluged with gleeful, mocking readers' comments pointing out all the mistakes. Readers DO notice.
It's all very well Mr Greenslade banging on about what "should" happen in an ideal world, but sadly the rest of us have to live in the real world and cope with all its shortcomings.
Until we have computers embedded in our brains that understand all the nuances of our language, everyone needs an editor. For example, how can I, as a reader, trust that you are right on the big issues when you wrote that someone lives on the 300 block of East 10th Street in Conshohocken when everyone in Conshohocken knows numbered streets are avenues? Should the reporter get it right the first time? Absolutely, but we are all human and we all make mistakes.
In addition, copy editors and editors offer a big picture perspective and institutional knowledge that provides greater depth to stories -- not even to mention clarity in writing. And there is the nasty little issue of plagiarism. Do we let the Mitch Alboms and Jayson Blairs write without anyone checking their material?
Throwing the stories in a dark hole in a foreign land won't raise our credibility. And having no one edit stories won't either. If we eliminate copy editors, sub editors and/or editors, we might as well give up our battle for survival and let everyone get their news from the Perez Hilton's of the world.
Teresa Schmedding
American Copy Editors Society
Greenslade seems to be saying that a journalist should be a jack of all trades but surely that will eventually water down his/her's efficiency . The next step-less and less journalists and so on.
That's just a fact.
The magazine world has long got used to this reality. Get other writers to proof your copy - that would get rid of most if not all of the errors. They may complain - but what would they prefer - no newspaper and no job, or something a little extra to do daily?
Subs are really just a fresh pair of eyes. There are cheaper alternatives to staffing a bank of people who, for the most part, just sit and correct typos each day.
But what Greenslade says smacks of the arrogance that has helped the industry into its dire straights, forcing it to think about removing "layers" in order to survive.
His main point is right but his reasoning is not.
And how nice that the Sun can keep it's 'creative' subs while the rest of us drones fill in templates for a pittance. I always regarded my input as creatively adding value to a product that somebody might want to buy, rather than just soullessly checking the spelling.
And why stop at outsourcing subbing? Buy in the lifestyle crap and get rid all those expensive feature desks; sack the photographers and rely on readers' happy snaps; swap the advertising staff for telesales from India and while you're at it sack the reporters and get the well-educated dupes doing 'meejah' studies at the the local further education college to fill the papers with tripe for free in return for the promise of 'work-experience'
But one plea: don't confuse sitting at home blogging your ill-thought out twaddle straight on to the web with proper journalism.
Why can't he just accept that subs (whether on parochial weekly, regional daily or - and bow down now - for the Sun) perform a valuable job. Much of the copy produced by reporters would be unpublishable. The readers would soon notice if that rubbish was actually published.
If we want dozens of papers that all look the same full of badly written error-strewn copy, then yay, bring on the revolution. Otherwise Roy, SHUT UP.
Design can be templated, yes. But how boring is that?
Newspaper pages, whether local or national, should project every story in the most interesting way possible, making best use of pictures, graphic elements, and with headlines that have true impact and make the reader want to engage with the product.
Greenslade's world is one of grey slabby text and publications that look like web pages with boring slabs of text and square pictures - that's no better than a parish magazine.
Intelligent, discerning readers deserve better from print journalism.
Who can remember what Greenslade's blog looks like, and who would want to?
But mention any major story of the last century and you can remember how you saw it in print.
That requires highly-skilled sub-editors, Mr Greenslade.
I'm far from illiterate, and I consider myself to be relatively well-educated, but I recognise the absolutely vital role that subs play in shaping, refining, fact checking and generally correcting my copy. The idea of getting rid of this crucial area of journalism, or outsourcing it and thus removing a layer of familiarity between the sub and the reporter's work, for me, is the height of absurdity - what a ridiculous statement to make.
WHAT a difference a year makes! "Blah Blah town's" cutest triplets "Twin 1", "Twin 2" and "Baby 1" "Surname" "Blah Blah's" cutest triplets celebrated their first birthday on "Day, "Month" "Date".
Once, When the tiny tots were born, they each tiny tot weighed less than under 4lb, but now they top the scales at 19lb, 18lb and 15lb 4oz respectively.
It is a sight 34-year-old parents full-time mum "Shaz" and "Dave", a gas fitter, husband "Dave" never thought they would see.
The couple, of from "Blah Road", "Blah", waited eight years for a child. After IVF treatment, they could not believe they were expecting were astounded to be expecting triplets. last year.
After the babies’ births 10-weeks early, birth "Shaz" and "Dave" had to wait another four anxious weeks before they could bring them home.
A year ago, beaming "Shaz" 33, said she was looking forward to the busy months ahead caring for identical twins "Twin 1" and "Twin 2" and their triplet brother "Baby 1".
Fire us all now.
It's headline copy garb (which I'm contributing to) to stir up a bit of chatter but does Greenslade have any idea what he's on about? Time to step out the luxurious office and find out what's really going on eh?
And doesn't the point about two sets of eyes costing twice as much as one only work if there are as many subs in an office as there are reporters? Where does that happen?
I am a writer and a sub, but there is no way I'd expect my work to appear in print/online without having been looked over by someone else.That is the difference between blogging and journalism, which is a craft learned over many years.
We all make errors (yes, we do) and even with subbing and revising, mistakes slip through the net because there is no time - and too few staff - to look over copy carefully and in a considered manner. Spell check is an all-too easily forgotten tool.
You only have to look at Hold the Front Page to see the howlers that have been made in papers that have got rid of the layer of subs.
Economically it might make sense, but from a quality point of view it doesn't. Newspaper owners across the country are killing the industry becasue they are happy to sacrifice quality for better profit margins.
It's tight, it's logical, it's (at a quick skim) free of error and has added quality to the debate.
Maybe that is, in part, one of the new measures of an article's worth – not just what a journalist writes, but the quality and number of responses their article provokes.
Now maybe you don't really count this as your work, and therefore feel it is of less value, but the collective worth of the comments flowing from Greenslade's article are worth much more, I feel, than the original article.
By writing here, posting with the quality that you have, you're very close to making Greenslade's point for him.
From my perspective, working on a number of local weeklies, I spend half my working week with my head in my hands - I'm rewriting poorly written, literal-strewn garbage from so-called bright reporters, some of whom seem to think that copying and pasting press releases into story documents is great journalism. To be fair, some of them are under such pressure because staffing levels have been whittled away that it's almost understandable that they take the easy option - but I'm still having to get on reporters' cases to check the most basic of facts which otherwise would go through.
A trainee reporter posted something on one of our websites this week without it being checked - there were three spelling mistakes, seven literals and the story was so badly-written that it was an embarrassment to the paper - THAT'S why you need subs checking.
What I offer I think, is indespensible. Has Greenslade even left his ivory tower and been in a regional press newsroom in the past 30 years?
Yes, subs make typos, yes subs sometimes make mistakes. But to suggest that's a reason to get rid is nonsense. Spend some more time on the ground, Roy!
But by the same token, if you place a reader's house in the wrong street or (God forbid) the wrong town, or spell the name of someone they know wrong, you are less likely to be getting their 40p for the paper or seeing them spend money with your advertisers - which is where the intrinsic value of subs comes in.
Yes, subs need to learn new skills - but let's make sure they're the right ones.
Martin Cloake, that's who.
What a small world.
It's to do with Spurs and Arsenal. I didn't know that.