Hard News: Sub Mission
47 Responses
First ←Older Page 1 2 Newer→ Last
-
So... ummm... there are quite a few typos in this, which I'm guessing is deliberate?
-
Buteven though some of the APN…
Just getting into the spirit of things…
-
And should it be, “subs bench” or “subs’ bench”?
ETA: There's quite a few more, but it does seem unsporting to grab all the hidden treasure for oneself.
-
Russell Brown, in reply to
So… ummm… there are quite a few typos in this, which I’m guessing is deliberate?
No. I came in from doing the satellite interview and had to write it very quickly to I could do a radio interview. Just had another editing pass on it. But yeah, it is hard to proof one's own copy.
-
Deborah, in reply to
That's just too honest of you, Russell!
-
Russell Brown, in reply to
ETA: There’s quite a few more, but it does seem unsporting to grab all the hidden treasure for oneself.
I’m grateful for any sharp eyes – it’s been a very busy morning – but you can just DM me on Twitter or something. I think I'll grab some lunch now.
-
Somewhere someone did daily updates from court in part of the Gaiman/McFarlane suit over the ownership of Spawn characters. My take away message was that this is one of those fields where people say the oddest things in court. And in judgments.
-
Most Beloved First Citizen, in reply to
ETA: There's quite a few more, but it does seem unsporting to grab all the hidden treasure for oneself.
Except if you are at a pirate party and you are the biggest.
Most Beloved First Citizen
-
I'm sorry, Russell. I wasn't trying to get at you I know how very hard it is to proof your own work. I really did think it was deliberate, a nice way of showing that a good sub is gold.
-
Good grief, Posner must have loved that one.
-
Russell Brown, in reply to
No worries. I'd been flat out since 6.30am -- finishing a magazine feature, conducting a satellite interview, being interviewed on the radio, and trying to write the blog post -- and I was fading a bit. Wolfing down a curry improved things considerably.
-
Bart Janssen, in reply to
it is hard to proof one's own copy
Yes! I'm a decent proofreader, something of a surprise to me because my spelling is not great. But for the life of me I can't proof my own writing. My eyes seem to run over the mistakes and my brain just fills in with what I meant to write.
-
And on topic. It seems that the problem is one of the corporate entity operating to maximize profit. In this case it is more profitable to out(in) source editing. Or perhaps more accurately treat sub editors as non-creative workhorses who can be packed into an open plan office to churn through their work without distraction by journalists.
It seems a predictable outcome of corporate ownership of journalism (or journalists). The corporation exists to maximize profit, the journalists exist to discover and disseminate knowledge/news. I can't see it as a good fit.
-
Ian Dalziel, in reply to
My eyes seem to run over the mistakes and my brain just fills in with what I meant to write.
The trick is to read the text expecting everything to be wrong...
-
Update: We’ve just also confirmed Rick Neville, COO and Editor-in-Chief, APN NZ Regional Newspapers and acting Head of Content at APN.
-
G in J, in reply to
it is hard to proof one's own copy
It is that. A colleague of mine recently recommended Claire Kehrwald Cook's Line by Line: How to Edit Your Own Writing to me, and it has proven useful. Much of it is stuff you already know, but it's nice to have a reminder.
-
merc, in reply to
I read it backwards, true.
-
Hebe, in reply to
Or perhaps more accurately treat sub editors as non-creative workhorses who can be packed into an open plan office to churn through their work without distraction by journalists.
Subs are journalists, oftentimes with many more years of experience than the reporter. Rarely, the two species can exist peaceably side by side and even intermarry.
-
Bart Janssen, in reply to
expecting everything to be wrong
I often read it out loud, it isn't great for my office mate nor for avoiding the mad scientist look, but it does catch some errors.
-
Bart Janssen, in reply to
Subs are journalists, oftentimes with many more years of experience than the reporter.
But from the perspective of a corporation managing resource units ...
-
Marcus Turner, in reply to
Wolfing down a curry improved things considerably.
Somewhere, we should preserve and cherish lines like this.
-
I'm a pretty good editor, even of my own writing -- but I do have a considerable advantage in that I'm usually not working to a constant short deadline. Most of the time I can leave my stuff sitting around for a week before coming back to it.
The concomitant disadvantage is that often I have to leave things for a week ... or a year ... in order to do other parts of my job, not least proofing student research writing -- after which, I need at least half a day just to work out WTF I was doing.
Occasionally, things end up being left far too long. Case in point: I started editing a book 6 years ago which, all going well, will finally make it into print this year.
-
linger, in reply to
Rarely, the two species can exist peaceably side by side and even intermarry.
As when subbing for the Dom ? :-P Sorry, couldn't resist.
-
Hebe, in reply to
But from the perspective of a corporation managing resource units
Infinitely more valuable: subs keep expensive lawsuits away and fill more pages more quickly than a reporter. I'm not making a value judgment but an observation.
-
Hebe, in reply to
? Sorry don't understand.
Post your response…
This topic is closed.