| |
Chamberlain's Commentary: For the Record |
|
By Jackie Chamberlain, Library Director For the record, I'm a strict constructionist. I make sure everything matches what appeared in print. I make sure the Library's done no harm in the process of enhancing. I attach corrections at the top of the text but don't change the errors. I flag serious errors with a "see" reference at the point of error. If a name is misspelled and no correction runs, I add a note with the correct spelling but I don't change the misspelling. That's the way it ran in the paper and that's the way it stays. And I will, and have, worked with vendors for however long it takes to get it right at their end too. Is the electronic archive an accurate reflection of the printed paper? No. In my case it's the longest version of a story, and only selected wire stories (which we keep in-house). The electronic archives are, I grant, an artifact different from the printed publication. Only on microfilm does that accurate record exist. Why then treat the electronic archive as if it were an official record? Well, how many people using information from an electronic source know that it's not the same as the printed version? How many think it's the real thing? (I have in fact seen lawsuits cite printouts from commercial services as evidence of what a print publication reported.) If we change anything at all, where do we draw the line? If I know you change some errors, how do I know what else you've changed? If I'm asked to find a story by your paper, how can I assure my reporter or editor that that's what appeared in the print edition? Or does it matter? Are we talking about two different kinds of "publication," one a pretty accurate version of the other, but representative rather than duplicative? What we print has limited exposure. We can't change errors, but we can limit their repetition. The same is true of a database that never leaves our corporate walls. But what happens when it circulates electronically beyond the traditional "circulation area?" Does that change the way we "publish." Do we change an error just because we can? Does that mutability make it a different publication from its print origins? Do we need to think about a caveat which says that while this electronic version of a story originated in print, it is not necessarily the same? I don't think there are easy answers. |
| Copyright 2003 - The Park Library - School of Journalism and Mass Communication - University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill |