Journalist asks: Why do we need editors?

Why do we need editors?

It’s a provocative question to pose publicly if you’re a journalist, and that’s exactly what GigaOM’s Mathew Ingram did today on Twitter:

He sparked an interesting discussion about the value of editing, how errors spread, and the ability of journalists to offer adequate correction. It’s a timely discussion, given the recent announcement that the Denver Post is eliminating its copy desk, and what that means for the business. Here are some of the highlights of the conversation.

We have made it easy to comment on posts, however we require civility and encourage full names to that end (first initial, last name is OK). Please read our guidelines here before commenting.

  • Libby Stack

    One reason is that there are too many “pretend” journalists out there right now.

    And granted, even editors and overseers still have a hard time getting things right sometimes. In the race to be first, things are put on the web in haste, sometimes rewording to make it seem “original”. The problem here is that some traditional and once trusted news outlets are now picking this stuff up and restating the misfires, assumptions, and sometimes conjured material under the guise of News.

    Case in point a few weeks ago on a very simplistic level – I wanted to go out and shoot the Super Moon that occurred recently. From the 3 local TV news affiliates, I got 3 different dates and times, none of them correct. I finally went to one of the science/weather sites that had it right.

  • RB

     “The rest would be fixed by an open market for news”. Ah yes. Why do we need regulation for anything? The invisible hand of the market will fix it. After all, it always has in the past. Some people take this guy seriously?