Apparently, on Sunday, records from 2007 (I believe) appeared on page 2A. I wasn't here, so I don't know who did this page, but I do know this is an easy error to make (I've done it before myself). The only way to tell that records are old is to look at the time/date stamp on the lower corner of the file. At least, that's the only way I know to tell.
Since this has happened before, it makes sense that we should figure out a way to prevent it from happening again. I've gone through and deleted all the files in public records that are older than a couple of months, but as far as I know, there's no way to make Newsedit delete old files for us.
How to do we make sure the records we are posting are current? We tried a records budget before, but it fell away. (also using a records budget didn't prevent old files from being published in other papers).
So what's the answer? Anyone have any ideas?
--Kristy
skip to main |
skip to sidebar
The copy desk mascot
When you have questions, the copy desk has stylistically correct answers.
Sluggy the troubleshooting slug
The copy desk mascot
AP Stylebook Web site
Blog Archive
-
▼
2008
(106)
-
▼
April
(20)
- Recommended podcast
- Text wrap, breaking news online training session
- Slugs, anyone? 'E' at a glance
- Slugging it out
- In the news, about the news
- Placing your dates and times
- Diagnosis incorrect
- Killed to death
- Relaxing the rules
- Old records
- Does it work?
- Where are we?
- Something funny
- What do you like?
- Apostrophe abuse
- White space around centers
- Why Advisers with an 'E'?
- Revisiting our Style Guide
- Spellcheck can't go it alone
- Welcome
-
▼
April
(20)
9 comments:
Maybe to avoid this problem and to ensure that all records are printed in a timely manner, we should work from a single "hold" file for each category. Instead of creating new police or courts files, reporters could place new entries in "police hold" or "courts hold" files, placing the newest information at the bottom of the document. Then, copy editors could pull whatever fits each day from the top of that file. Could this work?
That would be me who did it - I did both the records pages on Saturday (I presume you mean on Saturday for Sunday). When I look for records, I usually do a slug search for the date and the paper in question (for example, 0420 & WDH) and the categories. It would never have occurred to me to check the year, because, like you said, why would we still have year-old records sitting around? (Of course, I've seen far weirder things in the depths of NewsEdit, including recent files attributed to Ben Schultz and files attributed to me years before I ever interviewed.)
I think Liz's idea is a good start, though I worry about things like Government Meetings that are timely and that tend to provoke angry e-mails when they're not published. The "whatever fits" part is what bugs me there.
Benton...
I think we've solved the problem.
IT will set up an automated process that will remove NewsEdit files after two months of inactivity. This removal will be for all four papers only from the Records category.
This should prevent anything like this happening again. Do we need to implement this for any other category(s)?
— Brian
Brian,
I think we can start with Public Records and test that for a while, see if there are any problems.
Someone should make sure folks at all four papers are in the loop. Of course, if they are reading this blog, they are in the loop now.
— Mark T.
I like the idea of having old records files deleted, and I think it will work well.
I'm still curious, though, about the idea of condensing all Wausau Daily Herald court entries into a single document and placing all Wausau police/sheriff entries in another single document.
Because I rarely work with records content, I realize my ideas may not be realistic. However, I noticed recently when I did records pages that in Wausau, there are some courts and police files that apparently have been overlooked. Newer information has been printed, and so older records no longer seem relevant. Eventually, the files will be deleted.
Of course we don't want to print old information, but couldn't we do something in the future to keep reporters' work and information from going to waste?
elizabeth makes a good point.
I would like to note that NOT running some of the police and court records creates a bigger problem than just letting a reporter's work go to waste.
It exposes the company to legal liability if we are inconsistent about what we report on these matters.
If, for example, we publish some first-degree sexual assault charges in Marathon County court but neglect to publish others, we could find ourselves having to explain to attorneys and judges why there's a discrepancy. "We forgot" or "We didn't have enough space that day" probably won't fly.
There's also the matter of ethics and fairness.
— Mark T.
Since I do records pages more often than anyone else, I think I can speak with some authority on the issue Liz has brought up. I actually like the way Wdh handles police and courts (this being one large file). During the week I use it to fill the records pages (and other inside pages as they are available). What doesn't fit each day is put into a file for the next day. This works very well IF the person doing the pages remembers to make the new file. If the same person is doing the records pages each day, this isn't a problem. Of course, this doesn't happen all the time.
Here's a solution that might work: Since I do the pages most days, it's not a problem to remember that we have overflow. Before I leave for my weekends, I will send an email to everyone on the desk reminding them of what overflow is left, if any. Do we think this could help?
--Kristy
Sounds like a solution to me.
You can't communicate too much, when it comes to stuff like this.
Post a Comment