Here's a look at the front page of today's Hindustan Times, Delhi edition. The lead story (Nuke deal faces first vote today) starts with a typo in the intro itself:
Indian circles are guardedly optimistic one the eve of the first vote in the US Congress on the Indo-US nuclear deal.
Yes, it should have been on, not one. Those of us who have worked on the desk know that typos happen. We can never justify such mistakes, and we don't make fun of typos (i.e. of each other) either. We all make mistakes once in a while. But a typo in the intro of the lead in a national daily, a lead which is likely to have been double-checked by at least two persons, comes across as an embarrassment for the desk hands on duty. The lead has a few other problems too.
Negotiations among congressional leaders and Indian and US officials continued through Monday. The White House and the Indian embassy sought to co-opt as many congressmen as possible, largely by incorporating individual concerns about Iran, the NPT and fissile-material production into the non-binding sections of the bill. “India can accept or reject these as it wishes,” said diplomatic sources.
Firstly, NPT should have been spelt out. Secondly, "diplomatic sources" is vague. The story is datelined Washington/New Delhi. The sources could have been Indian diplomats in the US or US diplomats in India. Being specific ensures clarity in a copy.
The US nonproliferation lobby, which has denounced the deal, hoped that hardcore opponents like legislator Ed Markey could rally enough support to at least delay the bill.
Legislator is acceptable, but Congressman would have been better. The Senate of the United States of America is one of the two chambers of the Congress of the country, the other being the House of Representatives. It is a better idea to reserve legislator for a member of any Legislative Council or Legislative Assembly. The top single column (DU's first cut-off list may be misleading) is a classic example of a copy which has no style. By style I mean not flair, but consistency in usage.
- Somewhere it is cut-off, elsewhere it is cutoff (both as nouns).
- Somewhere it is 90 per cent (in words), elsewhere it is 10% (in symbols).
- Instead of the em-dash (—) the copy uses double hypens (- -).
This copy is a classic example because it is on the front page, and the same inconsistency in usage can be seen in the inside pages as well. There's consistency in being inconsistent. The front page did not provide me much fodder, but the inside pages have. Much more than you would believe. Yeah, believe me. I have, so far, decided not to write about the inside pages not because HT is paying me not to; but because I am too lazy to type through the day about mistakes committed by others. But if someone motivates me, I just might decide to waste one full day. And yes, I make typos too. These are often published as I would have typed them out. I cannot afford to maintain a chief sub-editor who would cross-check my posts for typos, oversights, bloomers, and what-have-you.
