Re: THE MOST UNKINDEST CUT

Subject: Re: THE MOST UNKINDEST CUT
From: James Mathewson <math0038 -at- GOLD -dot- TC -dot- UMN -dot- EDU>
Date: Fri, 12 May 1995 11:01:26 -0500

Being the editor of a magazine, I sympathize with the outrage over
editing standards. But I know from first-hand experience how easy it is
for errors to slip through. I get six or seven good sets of eyes to look
at the dummies before the disks are sent out. Yet, I invariably find
problems on the blue lines. I don't know if the data get corrupted at
prepress or what, but I could swear I send out perfect stuff and it
comes back with imperfections. Once they run the blue lines, it costs a
lot of money to make changes. At this stage, it is a matter of budget
concerns whether you make a particular change or not. Also, it takes
time (on the printer's end) to make these changes. If a magazine is going
to miss deadlines because of a few typos, it will lose advertising
revenue. So most editors accept a few mistakes. But if they're like me,
each one is as painful as passing a kidney stone.

james {:>l3


Previous by Author: Re: Technic writers shall write good,
Next by Author: Re: Factoid
Previous by Thread: Re[2]: THE MOST UNKINDEST CUT
Next by Thread: THE MOST UNKINDEST CUT


What this post helpful? Share it with friends and colleagues:

Sponsored Ads


Sponsored Ads