Mourning the death of analogue newspaper tradition

In the old newspaper tradition, there were gate keepers, each of whom had a duty to spot errors in reporting and writing. The news began its life in the hands of the reporter who gathered his information from written records or interviews with sources. As we used to say, he then banged out his story […]

In the old newspaper tradition, there were gate keepers, each of whom had a duty to spot errors in reporting and writing. The news began its life in the hands of the reporter who gathered his information from written records or interviews with sources. As we used to say, he then banged out his story on the bulky manual typewriter in the newsroom.

He next submitted his story to his news editor. The news editor was the first gate keeper in the newsroom. He checked the story for errors of facts. He checked to see that the story was basically factual, accurate and that sources cited by the reporters were real people, not ghost names, and the story was balanced with, where necessary, all sides given a chance to have a say. He must also ensure that the reporter did not interject his views into the story.

The fate of the story depended on what this first gate keeper did with it. A story could end its life right there on the desk of the news editor. If he was not satisfied with it, he spiked it. End of the story. If, however, the story was good and met the traditional criteria in keeping with the editorial policy of the newspaper, he moved it to the next level. In some newspapers, the assistant editor or deputy editor was the next gate keeper. He too must do what the news editor did, but with greater attention to how the story would be received by the public. He was the guardian of the reputation and the integrity of his newspaper. If he felt that the story would do more harm than good, even if it was factual, fair and balanced, he could spike it or take it before the editorial board with his views on it.

The editorial board chaired by the editor was the ultimate gate keeper. The editor was the final gate keeper. His decision on stories left no room for appeal. The approved story then began a new life in the hands of the process men known as sub-editors, headed by a chief sub-editor who assigned stories and page planning to his men. The sub-editors were powerful men we called backroom boys because neither they nor their work was known to the newspaper reading public.

Where the newspaper employed no re-write men, the sub-editors stepped in. In tabloid newspapers, they were given a free hand to re-write stories. They could turn a dull story into an exciting story. How they planned the newspaper pages, their choice of headlines and their choice of the accompanying illustration made all the difference between a story that was eagerly lapped up by the public and one that failed to shake the society.

Why do I recall this golden age of the analogue in newspaper publication? I offer you three good reasons. Firstly, I am nostalgic about it. I can see that the computer age is the age of simplification in the newspaper, but it is not the total blessing we think it is. Secondly, the digital age of the computer is an age of unreasonable assumptions in the newsroom. The word processor has a spell checker, for instance, and we assume that no mis-spelt word would escape its eagle eyes. We are wrong. Ask the spell checker to advise you on local names and see what it comes up with. I once asked mine to check the correct spelling of Jakande. It offered me jocund. Imagine.

Secondly, we assume that with the word processor equipped as it is with the capacity to check and even analyse his syntax and grammar, the reporter could not go wrong. Again, we are wrong. Science has attempted it, but it has not made man irrelevant. We are still the gate keepers and have the final say, whatever the computer might think or even assume in the newsroom

The gradual elimination of the gate keepers in the digital age leaves newspapers open to all sorts of dangers. Fake news, for instance, has become a new challenge in the newsroom. Rich newspapers and even not-so-rich newspaper concerned with their integrity and reputation employ fact checkers to ensure that their stories check out in terms of facts, accuracy, fairness and balance. This is expensive, but it is a price worth paying in a profession that stakes its integrity on reliability.

The goofs this time

So, let us take a brief look at some of the goofs in the Trust titles – the daily and the weekly – in the last month or two. On page 30 of the Daily Trust of October 23, we find this headline: “My husband beats me, sent me packing.” The rule of headline writing is that it should be in the present tense. It is wrong, as in this story, to have one verb (beats) in the present tense and another verb (sent) in the past tense.

A story on page 35 of the same issue tells us: “Man allegedly poses as police, rapes 14-year-old girl.” The Nigeria Police Force is an institution. No man can pose as police. He can only pose as a policeman.

On page 41 of the same issue, we find a story with this headline: “PM: No force can stop us from building nile dam.” Nile here refers to the River Nile. It is a proper name and must be so treated by the headline writer.

On the front page of the newspaper of October 22, a story was promoted with this headline: “Court orders forfeiture of Saraki’s properties in Lagos.” It seems the wall between property and properties is coming down. We should not let it. Property and properties are two different things. One is not the plural of the other. The court order dealt with property. Properties refers to the composition of matter or elements in nature. This is the business of those in the pure sciences.

On page 35 of the same issue, we find this headline: “2 farmers remanded over herdsman’s murder.” The accompanying story lead says: “An IIorin magistrate court in Kwara on Monday remanded….” The rule of thumb is that figures between 1 and ten in headlines and even stories be written in words. The headline writer failed to observe this basic rule. He had enough space to write two instead of 2. A common error now appears to be accepted by reporters and their editors as right and proper. The court in question was a magistrate’s court, not magistrate court.

I found this useless headline on page 34 of the Daily Trust of October 20: “Bacita: Kwara community where sugar factory brings bitterness.” What is that supposed to mean?

The Daily Trust of October published this story: “An expert in crop production, Ahkibi Onoke, has commended the Federal Government’s closure of Nigeria’s land borders against illegal smuggling.” I hope the crop production expert did not say that because he is too high up there not to know that there is no such thing as illegal smuggling just as there is no legal smuggling. Smuggling is an illegal act.

On page 37 of the same issue, the headline writer tells us that: “More dust rolls over Achuba’s impeachment.” That is news to me. Dust does not roll. In metaphorical sense, you can kick up the dust.

Here is the most unbelievable story I found on page 3 of October 21 issue of the newspaper: “An extremely hot porridge being transported in tricycle in Bauchi has claimed the lives of three children aged between nine months and nine years.” I have been drinking hot porridge all these years but can confidently say that no matter how hot it is, it cannot kill. If it is accidently poured on children or anyone for that matter, it can only scald them. The children died in an accident with the tricycle. The porridge had no hand in that regrettable family tragedy. Reporters have a duty not to make their newspapers look stupid.