On Mar. 1, Jack Shafer of Slate.com published this glowing paean to a reader with a seemingly endless appetite and ability for correcting the online magazine’s factual errors. It’s worth excerpting:
“RM ‘Auros’ Harman claims to have read practically everything published in Slate since 2000. Auros calls Slate his ‘basic news source’ and ‘a great digest.’ But he’s not a fool for it. A walking, talking, error-correction algorithm, Auros spots goofs in everything from Slate’s science stories to its politics copy to its movie reviews to its ‘Today’s Papers’ column, and he routinely sends his findings to the magazine’s corrections alias, corrections@slate.com.
“Like most newspapers — but unlike most magazines — Slate does not fact-check articles. …In the interests of accountability, Slate instituted a ‘Corrections‘ column about four years ago, and it collects and corrects between one and a dozen blunders a week for all the world to read. Auros is easily one of the most prolific ‘gotcha’ artists currently submitting corrections to the magazine. He says he started using the Corrections e-mail alias soon after it appeared and continued expunging errors from Slate copy because he got a good response from the editors.
“‘My sense of the magazine is that you have a more collegial relationship with your readers than, say, does the New York Times,’ Auros said in a phone conversation.
“Auros calls Slate editors collegial, but I’d give him most of the credit for the magazine’s graciousness: His polymathic challenges are direct and respectful. What more could a publication want?”
…This column demonstrates one of the most important lessons I believe any media organization can learn about online media. I’ve said it before: Online, community is golden. Embracing conversation is at least as important as producing a quality publication. This means listening respectfully to community members, letting them have a direct voice, and praising their contributions that enhance the overall quality and value of your online venue.
I know, none of us likes having our errors corrected or our conclusions disputed, especially in public. However, it helps to take the broader view. That’s why Shafer’s column is smart in several ways: It turns a potential flaw or humiliation into a source of strength and pride; it rewards community and loyalty; it encourages constructive public discourse; and — business-side folks take note — it enhances the Slate.com brand.
I’m dead serious about the branding benefits — just look at the 70 comments that Auros’ own blog post about his Slate coverage has garnered so far.
…Incidentally, here’s Poynter Online’s ongoing roster of corrections and clarifications. And thanks to the many Tidbits readers who have corrected this blog’s inevitable missteps over the years. Keep up the good work!
(Thanks to Mediabistro’s Fishbowl DC for the tip about the Slate column.)
