Poynter notes that the Denver Post has eliminated all of its copy editors and is now having its journalists take their stories from "reporting to publishing" without having layers of multiple checking. Just before the Poynter story was posted, this was a headline in the Denver Post:
Copy editors? Who needs 'em?
Here is a photo of the cover of the 2012 commencement pamphlet for the Lyndon B. Johnson School of Public Affairs at the University of Texas. Can you spot the mistake?
This is a classic example of Muphry's Law at work. Muphry's Law stipulates, among other things, that,
If a mistake is as plain as the nose on your face, everyone can see it but you. Your readers will always notice errors in a title, in headings, in the first paragraph of anything, and in the top lines of a new page. These are the very places where authors, editors and proofreaders are most likely to make mistakes.
If Muphry's Law holds true, there is probably a typo in this post as well, but I have not found it yet.
(Hat tip Huff Post)
Weldon Owen created this neat infographic--slightly tongue in cheek--showing how a book is made:
This is truer than anyone outside of the industry could ever guess. I haven't quit publishing and started a goat farm yet, but there have been times when I was close. Very close.
According to Gizmodo,
On May 1, a Missouri man named Duane Lester published on his personal blog a post titled "Changes Implemented After MO Auditor Finds ‘Serious Shortcomings' In Holt County Sheriff's Department." 10 days later, the local newspaper for Oregon, Missouri, covered the same story Duane had written about on his blog. In fact, the Oregon Times Observer was so inspired by his post, they used Duane's same headline and his copy! Without permission or attribution. All they did was tack on an extra paragraph at the end. Incredible!
But Duane didn't take this lying down. He went down to the Observer's headquarters and confronted Robert "Bob" Ripley, Publisher and Managing Editor of the Oregon Times Observer, arguably the man responsible for the plagiarism, bringing with him a letter asserting copyright. After a incredibly roundabout and generally difficult conversation, they ultimately cut Bob a check for $500.
Here is the video of the encounter:
"Oh, for pity's sakes ... in a little hometown paper!"
Yep, even little hometown papers must obey the copyright law.
"In my day ..."
In your day, violating the copyright was also wrong.
"You're going to make a fast five hundred bucks."
No, it took a lot of time to write the article they stole.
Why would they even think they could reprint an article in full without attribution and without permission? This is not fair use--it is simple theft.
Here is an MP3 of John's song. Feel free to download it and tell your friends about his music. (Right click to download.)
John is my eldest son. This is one of his compositions. He has a lot of experience playing and singing at clubs, but this is his first video.
If you think that this was a good song, please "Like" it on Youtube.
With such a steep discount, surely there will be a stampede of buyers.
(H/t Dave Barry)
The fish is apparently OK. On the other hand, the cat may now be in need of counseling.