The Quality-Control Quandry

I liked how this article stressed the importance of editors at a newspaper and how they are the "guardians of credibility." With that being said, I think the point I agreed with most in the article was that reporters are going to have to be more responsible for what they are reporting. As the number of editors dwindles and the amount of news copy stays relatively the same, someone is going to have t pick up the slack and it makes the most sense that it be reporters. I don't think it is asking much either. In our modern world, reporters have it relatively easy compared to ten years ago. Digital recorders, cell phones and computers have lightened the burden placed on reporters. It's easy for reporters to blur the facts when they can always go back and check their recording. If a reporter doesn't fully understand what he is reporting and isn't aware of any possible mistakes or false information, it isn't fair that the editors are responsible picking up that slack.

When incorrect information gets published, it's never really one person's fault, but editors will probably take the blame, seeing as they are the last set of eyes to read a story before publication. This isn't to say reporters easily get away with sloppy writing, but they do have an editor to ultimately blame for their mistakes. The pace at which editors work isn't conducive for extremely detailed fact checking. Reporters should be more responsible for the details in their stories-- details like numbers and names, the little things.

There are a lot of things that could make an editor's job easier, some feasible, some not. But one thing that can and should be done is on the side of the reporter. Being more responsible with the facts they report will make for better, more accurate news and enhance newspaper credibility.