|
Word processors have eased the job of reporters and the sub-editors as far as journalists dealing with languages using Roman and similar scripts are concerned. (The scripts of vernacular languages in India do not have a suitable key board.) At least some of you may be knowing that writing the leads for stories is a difficult task even for experienced reporters. Earlier, reporters used to change paper after paper on the typewriter till they could type in a good lead. Now, he can modify the lead any number of times without much hassle.
Similarly, a sub-editor handling the copy of a novice may need to bring an important point buried deep in the story to the top. Now, he can do it with a few strokes of keys. The word processor also provides many other features useful to the journalist which I do not hazard to list here. But, one facility which needs special mention is the ability of word processors to insert other files in the copy. Files can be easily combined and material from archives inserted into the body.
Maintenance and retrieval of material from newspaper morgues (for those unfamiliar with the term, "the morgue is where we keep obituaries of living people, especially the famous ones, until they are dead". But nowadays, many other things are also kept in the morgue) have become easier and quicker with electronic medium. The archives can be easily searched and retrieved material incorporated into copy. It is time that every publisher of newspapers and magazines worth the name has an electronic equivalent of a morgue.
Word processing and archiving have also brought in its own evils, or better say, devils. Most publications have practically abandoned proof-reading, leaving the job to spell check engines of word processors. But spell check engines have their own limitations. It will not flag a spelling mistake if spelling is wrong only in the current context. For example, the engine would pass the word if you type `their' where `there' is needed. A more dreaded mistake in publishing like `public' getting printed without the `l' can also go unnoticed this way.
Besides, many of word processors on sale in India use American spelling while we follow British spelling. The result is often a mix up of both American and British spelling. The spell check machine, as you know, can replace the wrongly spelled word with the correctly spelled word. It will, however, flag a correct word as misspelled, it the word is not in its dictionary. And sub editors may hit the key for replacement without applying the mind. The result of all this is a newspaper with more printer's devils than in the past. And the printer is innocent of the crime. Most of the printer's devils have been ostracized by photocomposing. A p or d will not be upside down anymore. But new devils have taken possession of publishing.
Easy access to archives and the capability to insert material from the archives without retyping is tempting many reporters to use archive material without rewriting. While this may be okay with material like biodata, it would not look that nice elsewhere. Owing to easy access to archives, reporters would be depending on them rather than scouting for the information afresh. Over dependence on archived reports can result in repetition of errors committed in earlier reports. However, the balance is in favour of archives. Reference to past events and issues in the archives will help to avoid more mistakes than it is likely to cause. Reporters will also be able to add much more background and depth to their reports through use of archives.
Newspapers used to be considered one day wonders that are discarded the next day. Except for researchers and their ilk, few would be searching back issues of newspapers. But this has changed with the availability of searchable newspapers, back issues and archives on the Internet. And this has increased the responsibility of all working behind newspapers. They are more likely to be hauled up for a mistake committed years ago than ever before. More than mere mistakes, one may find reports contradicting each other in the same newspaper, if one scans through a longer period of reportage by different reporters. No doubt, that can be very embarrassing for the newspapers and reporters. However, more at risk will be the politicians. They can be easily caught for their contradictory statements.
|
Participants