CoreyStruss

"For every mistake, a form is fill out answering such questions as: Who made this error? How did it occur? How did it come to our attention? Were deadlines a factor? Could it have been avoided? The form displays the error as it appeared, a corrected version, and a correction or clarification proposed for publication."

Why don't all newspapers do this? It seems like the Chicago Tribune is the only paper that has this whole process right. For one, this whole process is so redundant and time-consuming, that it would encourage their writers to try their best not to make mistakes. I mean, honestly. Who would really want to go through this whole process, if it could be avoided by close reading? Second, the things that the author must do when they DO actually make a mistake seem like it would correct it. If you find out who made the error, and under what circumstances it occurred under, and if it could have been avoided, then you are cracking down on the news writers, in turn making them more accurate, more complete writers.

I really wonder if other newspapers in the U.S. go through this same type of process, or if they just brush the errors aside. This shows that the Chicago Tribune isn't perfect by any means, but are willing to fix their errors and provide the public with accuracy. If competing papers don't do this process, what kind of process do they do? Is it as extensive? I JUST WANNA KNOW!