« Previous | Next»

8 Apr 2007

Faux Pas

Posted by Oblivion in General | 5:53pm

20 per cent of people are chronically poor spellers, due to a neurological glitch. A good part of the remaining population goof up with spelling (I'm not referring to typos. Typos are tolerable) because they don't, to my mind, study words properly enough. This extends to names too. If the newspaper vendor gets your name wrong, it isn't much of a bother. His job doesn't demand him to be good at spelling. But if you are a copy editor with a leading newsmagazine, you are expected to be meticulous.

Names - like spelling - are partially dependent on geography, so the naming conventions differ among regions and cultures. There's no such thing as misspelling in Italy, Spain, Portugal and other countries, for they have a more straightforward orthography. English is more prone to misspelling because it has an irregular spelling structure and has about 1,120 letter combinations to make 44 sounds. In comparison, Italian has 33 letter combinations to spell 25 sounds.

With names, it gets more tricky. Besides the usual challenge of getting the sequence of letters in the name correct, one has to get the sequence of the complete name (first-name-middle-name-last-name) correct. When one has no information of the convention that a person's name has been derived from, it's better to go by what that person himself mentions than rely on guesswork. I'd like to believe this should be among the important rules that people in media should be taught.

Outlook newsmagazine, its deserving credibility and smart team notwithstanding, never ceases to surprise me. I mention first-name last-name-initial with the letter, and the guy changes it to first-name-initial last-name in the published version. He expanded the last name when all I mentioned was the initial! And, obviously, he got it wrong (next time, I'll try Vito Corleone and see how he mindhandles it). Not for the first time. Not a critical mistake, but it is, nonetheless, an avoidable one. The chap must be either dumb or overconfident, and neither of these is a desirable attribute of an editor with a newsmagazine.

If it was The Economist, such a goof would be unthinkable. Although Outlook matches The Economist in values, yet it lags much behind as regards standards. And I'd like to see at least one magazine from India to be as good as The Economist is. A dream!

Current Mood: Happy
Current Music: ---

2 Comments | "Faux Pas" »

  1. By Vj

    11 Apr 2007, 8:02pm [ Reply ]

    @PJ: One of the erstwhile editors of The Economist was asked to delete some details and slant the story in favor of the governing party during the world war, or risk losing his job. He promptly stood his ground and replied, "I'm not here to polish shit". That conviction reflects on every page and has been its hallmark.

    Well, we don't have a magazine in India (in the world, for that matter) that matches The Economist, but Outlook is the best of the lot. It is content-driven (as is The Economist, too) rather than marketing-driven, relies on research, cautious in reporting, and bold and honest in analysis. It has its flaws, but doesn't flaunt itself to be perfect. After the demise of the glorious The Illustrated Weekly of India, this is the magazine that stands out. A brilliant, if a tad eccentric, editor and a smart team - I'll take it even if it comes with a few spicy pages, done for business interests. Feeling 'insecure', again, is a business need and I don't feel it's a bad bargain when the product compromises little on quality. Stands alongside The Hindu and The Statesman on that count. The presentation has undegone a change, but that's only to "connect" with a wider audience. But it hasn't come with a sorry sacrifice in preference for content.

    No kind of economy is perfect. If you ask me to choose between a capitalist economy that thrives on opportunity, if in a ruthless way, and doesn't mind exploitation of freedom and an authoritative regime that severely thwarts freedom, I'd go for the capitalist one. We have many such regime where the run of a magazine like Outlook is unthinkable. So, I'll take the capitalist one, even with its failings :-)

  2. By PJ

    11 Apr 2007, 11:55am [ Reply ]

    Does Outlook really match The Economist in values? I have my doubts about that. Especially when I see Outlook feeling 'insecure' by India Today's presence. The latter is merely a facade in the name of a News magazine while it really is a pseudo-news-lifestyle tabloid (well, almost). But Outlook, in the past, had a very different approach to News and was rated one of the most reliable and value-based News magazine. Off late, even Outlook is compromising on News quality by fishing-in Page-3ish and juicy content simply to capture a share of the pie in the pseudo-readers market. Ah, well! I suppose we all live in a Capitalistic economy, so who cares if a magazine like Outlook still sticks on to its journalistic values or not.

Add comment