• Reporter expertise. A paper our size (90,000 daily, 110,000 Sunday) is a prime recruiting ground for metropolitan dailies. This causes turnover in critical reporting areas, such as business, environment and military reporting. When we experienced a 100 percent turnover in our three business reporting positions, we used the opportunity to experiment with an intensive on-the-job orientation and expertise development with our new hires. This included weekly time on the job to visit businesses and sources without any scheduled stories. We also increased subscriptions to business publications, joined business writing groups and established analysis of expertise development as part of the three-month probation period review. We have used our corrections database to track factual errors generated by reporters, and the business department has had the lowest error rate, even as the department’s production has increased. Similar programs are now used with other new reporters and editors, with the duration and depth depending on their beats and the employees’ experience level.

• Editors and readers wrote about the ASNE Journalism Credibility Project and Gannett's ethics program.

  Copy editing. We experimented with separating pagination and copy editing duties. Copy editors had been doing half a dozen duties in one night: reading copy, designing pages, writing heads, proofing pages, sizing pictures, paginating. We experimented with separating the duties, so an editor would spend an evening doing nothing but reading copy and writing heads. The work was rotated so they didn’t get in a rut. When we couldn’t create an entire work shift devoted to specific duties, we experimented with creating larger blocks of time devoted to one task. This reduced the number of times editors had to change their focus on a task. All of these approaches seemed to improve copy editing. Specific quantitative data was hard to develop, but anecdotal evidence, testimony from copy editors and reviews by groups of readers indicate they saw improvements.

We also used dozens of volunteer community proofreaders to help us analyze the quality of our work and to help raise the consciousness of our copy editors about the importance of their work. Copy editors loved the attention and enjoyed talking to readers who hold the detail work they do in high regard. They seldom get such direct feedback from readers. This effort appeared to help raise copy editor morale, which in the long term may help retention and accuracy of copy editing.

• Local knowledge. We developed expert databases using resources on the staff and are producing an interactive CD that will be used in orientation and recruitment. We created committees within the newsroom to accumulate information and produce the databases. Supervisors encourage their use and we utilize staff meetings and training to remind staffers that the information is available.

“We decided to make our corrections more prominent, to make them easier to understand and to let readers know we would correct errors promptly.” – Bob Stover

Q: Please detail the process by which you implemented the initiative.

We involved editors, reporters and copy editors from all departments in planning the experiments, and created committees to run each one. As a result some turned out better than others, but there was involvement throughout the newsroom.

Q: How easily did the newsroom come aboard? How did you handle communication, motivation and commitment?

The corrections policy was the hardest sell. Some reporters thought the emphasis on corrections was merely an attempt to build a case against them for disciplinary action. This hasn’t happened, but we have been able to identify weaknesses and take steps to improve specific systems. For instance, when our corrections indicated we were making errors taking phone calls from stringers, we had more experienced people take calls and increased training of news assistants. We had small department-level meetings to stress the point that readers and sources think more of you when you admit your mistakes. We had to repeat it a lot, but eventually they seemed to agree.

Readers who volunteered to be proofreader gained an appreciation for what newsroom staffers face on deadline.

Copy editors had some hesitancy about the desk changes. Some of them thought they would be turned into paginators and wouldn’t get to edit. But we made sure they had plenty of chances to give us feedback, and we listened. We did moderate the proposed changes as a result. The rotating of jobs and creation of blocks of time referred to earlier were the direct result of copy editor concerns. By adapting our experiment to consider their objections, we found other ways that seemed to work as well as our original suggestions. It helped them buy in to the project and showed that staff involvement in changes is helpful, if not essential.

The expertise and local knowledge segments were applauded by the participants, but some editors were slow to give up on the “throw them in and see if they can swim” approach.

7% of market residents were aware of Florida Today's program of inviting readers to come into the paper and proofread pages. 26% said they'd be interested in participating in the proofreading programin the future (8% were "very interested"). 13% were aware of Florida Today's efforts to improve accuracy.

Q: Describe community outreach efforts related to the project.

We asked readers to call our Reader Services Desk, which is the primary conduit for calls into our newsroom. The corrections policy made this desk the focal point for readers to call to point out corrections. The staffers, led by our reader services editor, were involved in the corrections policy discussions and given the task of passing complaints to department heads and making sure corrections or clarifications followed. The reader services editor also keeps up with the corrections database and provides reports to the managing editor. The reader services editor also started a monthly column to discuss corrections and other matters of concern to readers.

Lou Simpson's column (above) invited readers to contact the Reader Services Desk

We invited readers into the office to proof pages and to become permanent watchdogs for typos, misspellings and factual errors. Later, Florida Today also created a public editor position to address credibility and ethics. This person writes a weekly column on the subject. The position was an outgrowth of Gannett’s Principles of Ethical Conduct for Newsrooms initiative and the ASNE Journalism Credibility Project. Both projects recognized the need to have a point person to facilitate discussion of these issues on a regular basis.

47% read the corrections box on 2A 83% of those who read the corrections box said it was worded clearly. 48% said the errors that were corrected were important matters that readers should know about. 79% believe that publishing a corrections box will accomplish the goal of telling readers about efforts to increase the accuracy and credibility of the newspaper and ensure that reporters and editors are always alert to potential mistakes.

Q: How aware were your colleagues in other newspaper departments of the credibility project?

They were very aware. We discussed it at Operating Committee meetings as pieces were developed. The group was very supportive, especially our publisher and Customer Relations Department, which deals with some of the same concerns raised in the credibility project.

Q: Did the credibility initiative spark other ideas and/or changes in your newspaper? Please describe.

The ASNE initiatives dovetailed nicely with Gannett’s program, which started last summer. The goals are similar, especially when it comes to accuracy. Our participation in the credibility study gave us a nice base and elevated our discussion of the ethics policy when it was announced. Staffers had already gotten past any resistance they might have had.

Q: What were the most important lessons learned about credibility?

The most important thing you can do is put credibility high on the list of priorities for each news staff member. You can make great strides simply by making credibility a regular newsroom discussion topic. Then you can build on that by setting specific credibility objectives – such as trying to be more accurate.

Q: What were the toughest?

You can work your butts off for months on improving the most important things to gain a small amount of ground, then have one sensational story or one royal screw-up kick you down the ladder.

Q: If you had it to do over again, what would you do better or not do at all?

Increase the communications with readers. Involve them more in discussing what we should do and then increase the amount of information we provided them about our initiatives. We used some columns and articles to publicize our efforts and involve readers, but we could have/should have done more. We should even consider using direct mail pieces to readers and non subscribers to tell them about new credibility initiatives. The ASNE project, followed by the Gannett ethics program, convinced us that there is no more important issue to newspapers – and their readers.

Q: How can newspapers continue to build credibility and increase public trust in the future?

• Sell the staff on its importance and make it an important part of the newsroom culture.
• Include readers in developing objectives.
• Have J-schools teach the concepts on which we all agree.