It's important to remember, however, that reporters are already held somewhat accountable for their copy by the inclusion of their byline. Copy editors have no bylines.
Far be it from me to complain about copy desks -- copy editors have saved me on any number of occassions -- but when a copy editor makes a mistake, there is no public accountability. Readers simply assume that the writer was in error. Such incidents can be incredibly demoralizing to reporters. It's one thing to look like an idiot if you make a mistake, but when the copy desk makes one in your story. . . Ouch.
Of course the best way for a writer to protect her name is to turn in clean copy. That's incentive enough.
Amy CannataStaff writerSpokesman-Review
But any copy desk can tell you how much defective copy arrives every day: stories in which proper names are spelled inconsistently, stories that have never been spell-checked at all, leads in which words have been omitted, outrageous solecisms such as "it's" for "its" and innumerable other marks of carelessness.
I don't mean to kvetch: As a copy editor, I know that the sloppiness of reporters and originating editors guarantees my job security. But we have many colleagues who, like Edwardian gentlemen unwilling to lose caste by going into trade, appear to believe that accuracy and precision in writing are to be left entirely to the servant class on the copy desk.
Do you think that praise and rewards for good work will be enough to reform the incorrigible? And if not, then how should newsrooms deal with them?
John McIntyreA.M.E./Copy DeskThe Baltimore Sun
