(09-14-2021 11:13 AM)Cyniclone Wrote:  

(09-13-2021 05:16 PM)FriscoDawg Wrote:  

(09-13-2021 12:34 PM)ODU BBALL Wrote:  

(09-13-2021 01:01 AM)FriscoDawg Wrote:  Any AAC expansion article that lists Louisiana-Monroe on a candidate list isn't worth reading.

Not that it matters that much but on the AAC board a few have stated that this guy generally has legitimate sources and that he also is prone to having some typos. Specifically, they said they thought he meant to say ULL instead of Louisiana-Monroe.

Point stands either with outright typos or bad editing. Any article on expansion can't get the school names wrong.

Any factual error on the main subject of an article used to earn an automatic fail for that project in any journalism class. Guess standards have been dumbed down.

Speaking as a former reporter and current copy editor, even the best of the best have brain farts. I've caught what would have been major errors from accomplished, talented reporters because human error is human error, no matter the human. I've also made those errors and I was never half the reporter they were, so who the hell am I to judge?

Especially in today's journalism world where you're fighting a large and diverse pool of reporters who either don't have the copy editor/line editor support safety net they had 20 years ago or are one-man shows that have no net at all, these things will happen. Rushing to get the story out, you transpose "Lafayette" and "Monroe". Back in the day, the chances were great that someone would have caught that. Now, factchecking is more and more likely to be a crowdsourced endeavor.

Of course, if ULM *does* join the AAC, then the 2021 Pulitzer prize for conference realignment and gardening journalism will be sewn up.

Easy to make mistakes, but it's also easy to have someone you trust proof read your copy. I owned a Graphic Design Firm for 15 years. Just me, no one else, but I always had someone to proof read my copy. Hell, your laptop will even read it back to you for free.