'The Post' had several corrections throughout the past two weeks. We're looking to avoid repeating those same embarrassing mistakes.
I'm not sure it needs saying that messing up facts in a story is embarrassing.
The moment a reporter realizes something was incorrect in his or her story, there's an unexplainable panic and dread that comes rolling in. Our bylines are attached to both our proudest moments in journalism and our worst. That alone can induce anxiety in even the most confident reporter.
From experience, I can say that the first thought a reporter has is "How did this happen?" Moments later it's "How in the heck do I make sure this never happens again?"
That's the conversation we at The Post have been having all week.
Both this week and last, we have issued several corrections and clarifications on thepostathens.com and on Page 2 of our print edition. Some of those corrections were silly, and some were just careless. All were embarrassing and damaging to our newsroom's perception as a place of professionalism and pride.
If readers are wondering if we're doing anything to prevent such mistakes from happening, we are — we just need to improve. Our stories are fact-checked by respective section editors, and copy editors, slot editors and late-night editors often catch whatever a section editor might have missed right before we send the paper to the presses.
Often, reporters are fact-checking themselves, too. That means going through each and every "fact" (think names, places, dates, times and dollar signs) and double-checking, triple-checking and sometimes more by looking at their notes, whatever documents they may have consulted and any information from interviews with a source.
Still, facts get missed. It's hard to imagine that after all those barriers blocking a reporter or editor from mistakes that they would, but it happens in the most prestigious of newsrooms — not that we're looking for an excuse.
If anything positive has come out of the number of corrections we've had in the past few weeks, it has been a productive sort of paranoia that keeps Post reporters and editors on their toes, wondering how they can improve and how they can avoid making the same mistake twice. Sometimes that means annoying a source over the phone or email to confirm this or that number, or having multiple editors view the same story looking for errors.
It may mean more work on our end, but we're looking for more reasons to be proud of the work our names are attached to — not less.
Emma Ockerman is a junior studying journalism and editor-in-chief of The Post. Want to talk to her or let her know about an error you saw in The Post? Email her at eo300813@ohio.edu or tweet her at @eockerman.
