Strat 18

Originally, the Independent Florida Alligator’s article “Medieval fair mixes old with new” had a different headline. The original headline said that 14,000 people total had attended the Medieval Fair.

The Alligator then ran a correction that read: “A headline in Monday’s newspaper stated that 14,000 people attended the Hoggetowne Medieval Faire. That is the figure for Saturday alone. The attendance figure for Sunday is unknown.”

In this example, the editor is at fault because he or she wrote the headline based on the story. The story says that 14,000 attended the fair on Saturday when the reporter was at the scene. This is a problem of not checking numbers and not looking at the big picture.

Does it make sense that only 7,000 people attended the fair each day? How big is this medieval fair? The editor should have compared attendance to previous years to make sure the numbers matched up. A quick phone call to the fair’s organizers could have prevented this issue.

This incident is an example of skeptical editing. An editor should be especially careful when it comes to numbers. These mistakes are easily made, and they make the organization look foolish. I think all editors should have a skeptical editing checklist next to their desks to look at each time they work.