Writers glory in their highly visible bylines. Photojournalists and graphic artists thrive on credit lines and compliments for distinctive artistic presentations. Editors have power and prestige. They direct stories, define news coverage and shape careers. Good work draws rewards. For almost everyone except copy editors. Traditionally theirs has been an unglamorous, thankless task. They labor anonymously, saving the newspaper from embarrassment, reader scorn and legal actions. Yet rewards are few. In recent years the situation has gotten worse. The spread of new technology, particularly the shift to pagination, has increased the number of tasks copy editors are required to perform. Technology also changes the copy editor’s job description, leaving some feeling caught between the traditional roles of wordsmith and page designer, and a new role as production manager. Their plight has not gone unnoticed. ASNE’s Human Resources Committee issued a report in 1989 describing copy editors as “disillusioned gatekeepers.” The report, “The Changing Face of the Newsroom,” also said this about the group:
A 1993 study of journalists by two professors concluded that the group most likely to face burnout was copy editors, particularly young editors who are asked to do a number of different tasks. The study said they are paid less than an average income, express intentions to leave the field, and have found journalism to be much different from what was expected.
With this background, Merv Aubespin, this year’s chair of the Human Resources Committee, decided to revisit the 1989 study. That study included a list of “Implications for actions” affecting groups throughout the newsroom. The first step addressed copy editors. It said:
Aubespin said little had been done in the six years since the report, so in 1995 his committee began a national conversation with copy editors. That first step was a meeting of copy editors for 21 daily papers. They gathered on the University of North Carolina campus in September 1995 and spent two days outlining the problems faced by their colleagues in the nation’s newsrooms.
Participants vented frustrations. They said reporters and editors miss deadlines then expect the copy desk to “stop time.” They listed problems, analyzed them and grouped them, finally settling on seven topics that weren’t too different from the 1989 list. They were as follows:
Next, 33 newsroom managers and desk leaders joined copy editors from the Chapel Hill meeting at the University of Kentucky in January 1996 to propose solutions for the problems. The problems were narrowed to five categories – pagination, staffing, training, recognition and restructuring. Solutions, suggestions and case studies are presented here.
The Human Resources Committee calls on ASNE members to read the report, then work with copy editors to improve the newsroom.
