Three Reasons I Would Update a Published Article
Posted: Monday, December 15, 2008
by Terry Mitchell
http://commenterry.blogs.com
I have occasionally been accused of updating and/or postdating published articles to make my various economic or political predictions seem more accurate. Rest assured that I do no such thing. If did this, why are most of my predictions wrong? When I do get one right once in while – like a broken clock – there are those who want to begrudge me of even that small kernel of satisfaction.
Anyway, there are only three basic reasons why I would go back and update an already published article. The first would be to correct any typos and grammatical errors after the fact. My goal is to always publish articles that are free of such mistakes. However, like everyone else, I'm not perfect and often don't catch them until after articles have been published.
The second reason is to correct factual errors that I catch on my own or that others bring to my attention. Many of the facts I use in my articles are from memorized information, so there are some things I don't have to look up. However, when I am not at least 99% sure about a given fact, I will look it up to make sure I get it right. However, some of the facts in my head often don't get communicated to my fingers. For example, I once wrote that Hugo Chavez was the president of Colombia, even though I knew better – that he is actually the president of Venezuela. I was typing quickly and there was a failure of communication between my brain and my fingers.
This reminds me of something that happened to then-President Gerald Ford in a 1976 presidential debate with Jimmy Carter. Much to the shock of the media, the pundits, and the TV audience, Ford stated that Eastern Europe was not dominated by the Soviet Union. Of course, at that time in history, Eastern Europe was indeed under Soviet domination. And, in his role as the leader of the free world at the time, Ford obviously knew this. Why he said what he did is anyone's guess. I can only surmise that it was due to his being excited about the debate or possibly becoming tongue-tied. Perhaps I make those kinds of mistakes because I get finger-tied.
The third and final reason is to add clarification when needed. I know it's needed when too many people are evidently misunderstanding something I wrote. When I was in school, I was taught that ambiguity is always held against the writer. In other words, if I write something and you don't understand it, it's not your fault – it's my fault for not stating my thoughts clearly enough. Just because a writer knows what he or she is writing about doesn't necessarily mean his or her readers will. It is the responsibility of writers to ensure that their work won't create confusion for the average reader. Even if clarifying an article means significantly increasing its length, so be it. That's what I'll do.
This Article has been viewed 92 times. (Not updated in real-time.)
Top-level comments on this article: (1 total)Hi Terry.Great article. Those most definitely are three good and valid reasons to edit an article.Dianne
We want your comments! If you can read this, you don't have javascript enabled, so you can't use this comment system. Please enable javascript.