Thanks very much, Lily. My comment isn't about AI, rather it's about being asked for copy approval, as you mention at the end. The same thing happened to me last week. I told the source that yes, they could have copy approval, but I was not obliged to change anything if I could produce an accurate record of what they originally said. That was what I was taught when I was training. The source promptly declined the interview and I wonder if that was the reason.
Hi Ralph. I'm very surprised you were told in training that sources could see the copy. We were taught never to allow a source to see any of the copy. But maybe the training advice has changed. Like Emma says, I would only ever show a source their quotes rather than the full copy if it was a particularly technical piece and I needed to fact check what they had said. The only caveat to this would be an as told to piece in the first person. The source would then get a read back to make sure they were happy with the piece since it was in their words. As Emma says we will dig into this some more in a future newsletter as its a real bone of contention.
Hi Ralph, Emma here (it was me that added that part on the end). We are planning a newsletter on this in a couple of weeks because it comes up a lot. I tend to say if they ask in advance (where it is appropriate and it's not always) I can show them their quotes but keep it vague and I don't make any promises. Never give full copy approval - ie, the full piece. Most of the time they don't change anything at all and this is usually for experts for a specialist publication where I need their wisdom but they're worried that they'll say something stupid. Wouldn't offer that in any situation where I was holding someone to account in their job, etc.
Horrified to see the mistake in my comment. I meant quote approval, not copy approval. I must have been thinking of 'copy' when I wrote that. Embarrassing for me that anyone would think I would offer copy approval.
Thanks very much, Lily. My comment isn't about AI, rather it's about being asked for copy approval, as you mention at the end. The same thing happened to me last week. I told the source that yes, they could have copy approval, but I was not obliged to change anything if I could produce an accurate record of what they originally said. That was what I was taught when I was training. The source promptly declined the interview and I wonder if that was the reason.
Hi Ralph. I'm very surprised you were told in training that sources could see the copy. We were taught never to allow a source to see any of the copy. But maybe the training advice has changed. Like Emma says, I would only ever show a source their quotes rather than the full copy if it was a particularly technical piece and I needed to fact check what they had said. The only caveat to this would be an as told to piece in the first person. The source would then get a read back to make sure they were happy with the piece since it was in their words. As Emma says we will dig into this some more in a future newsletter as its a real bone of contention.
Horrified to see the mistake in
my comment. I meant quote approval, not copy approval.
Ah! That makes more sense!
Hi Ralph, Emma here (it was me that added that part on the end). We are planning a newsletter on this in a couple of weeks because it comes up a lot. I tend to say if they ask in advance (where it is appropriate and it's not always) I can show them their quotes but keep it vague and I don't make any promises. Never give full copy approval - ie, the full piece. Most of the time they don't change anything at all and this is usually for experts for a specialist publication where I need their wisdom but they're worried that they'll say something stupid. Wouldn't offer that in any situation where I was holding someone to account in their job, etc.
Horrified to see the mistake in my comment. I meant quote approval, not copy approval. I must have been thinking of 'copy' when I wrote that. Embarrassing for me that anyone would think I would offer copy approval.