Who should proof read pages and be incharge of content?

[lmarshall]

I am doing a web design internship at a company. The Marketing department provides the content and images for the web site and it the one I mainly have dealt with. The stuff that marketing gives me is usually not editted and if I catch spelling errors I usually change them, however if it's deals with grammer I uaually don't do anything with it because I see it as "their" content and the way they want it to appear on the web site. (some stuff I don't understand anyway when they are talking about their product.)

The other day when I showed my boss, who is an IT Manager he was greatly disapponted in my work because I did not go through the web site and fix the grammer errors in the content. I told him I didn't know I was suppose to fix the errors.

For future reference, I am requesting a poll on who people think should be in charge of the content and proofreaduing when your a web designer.

[MotherNatrsSon]

Well I would say it depends on a couple different things.

One) If you are working for an inhouse design company, they usually have people with the title "editor" that do all the proofreading and corrections.

Two) If you are the design company yourself, you get that title(editor) as well.

My mentor is a graphic designer and does only the design part of a site. Then there are coders that do the coding, and editors that do the editing.

I suppose there are many possibilities between these two I have pointed out. I do not think it was right of your boss to say a word to you without making it clear that was part of YOUR task in the first place. Be sure to bill him a few hours for doing the job of editor and maybe he will hire one or be sure to tell you in advance you need to edit as well as design and code.

MNS

[Vladdy]

It's part of initial negotiation.
I always give my clients an option to have thier copy edited (charging extra ofcourse), and if they reject it the final contract states: "All copy will be placed on the web site AS IS ..."
However, remember that copywriting is more than just correcting spelling and grammAr

[Mr J]

I would point out the error of their ways and offer alternatives, but the final word would be theirs.

The customer is always right, ....... well almost
:D

[Spookster]

I agree with Vladdy.

Obvious spelling mistakes if I see them I will usually correct but if the information itself is incorrect or there are grammar problems I leave it up to the client to proofread it before they give it to me unless we have agreed to something otherwise.

[brothercake]

I always read everything, but usually only quickly to look for obvious spelling mistakes. If I spot grammatical errors I usually tell the client, but don't fix them unless comissioned to do so.

But .. that's working as a freelancer. If you're working directly for a company as a salaried webmaster, I think your responsibility to the site as a whole should be greater. My last full time job was like that, and I always copy-edited everything I put up, even the articles which had already been copy edited.

I don't think it is actually your responsibility when it comes right down to it, but in such a situation you'll get much better kudos if you do that "added value" service :thumbsup: Because what end users see is the site, and the difference between editorial and technical may not be so obvious to them - they just notice if it's "good" or not - just because your boss is the IT director, doesn't mean he knows anything about IT ..

[bradyj]

Originally posted by Spookster
I agree with Vladdy.


I also agree with Vladdy -- it falls on the customer to create their content (as we most likely don't know their products, or industry)... certian errors are welcome to be caught by the designer, but it's not essentially our responsibility. But it is professional courtesy...

[Skyzyx]

I believe that it should be a combination of the two. The original work should be correct, but if it isn't I'll go back and fix it. It reflects poorly on myself otherwise.

Kind of like when you see some kids acting like punks, you figure they have bad parents (although that isn't always the case); If I come across a poorly copy-written website (or one that's designed poorly) I usually fire off a negative comment to the web design firm before I do anything with the actual website owners...

[bazz]

my 2p/2c worth.

My view is that the person who provides the text, is the one ultimately responsible for proof-reading it for spelling and grammar checks, before it is uploaded to a live web page. The person compiling the web pages cannot be expected to know what the author of the site wants to say and any thoughts of the 'typist' (now there's a word from the past? ), will usually be seen as wrong when the author sees their changes. And I believe that this applies whether an employee or a separate design company. As an employee, it would show perhaps, a more keen worker if they were to have proof read it of their own volition (like an added value thing) as this would demonstrate the typist's initiative and show an ability to work somewhat unsupervised, which for an employer is a real employee asset. :cool:

However, if a separate company there are such issues as customer service and client relationships to deal with so in that case it might be a good idea to type it as requested and separately, highlight those words and phrases that you (as designer), think may read better if done a different way.

FYI, this is based on experiences my kin folk had when working in a typing environment of a lawyers office. The legal people said type it as is - especially quotes (irrespective of poor grammar), and if there are some instances where you think there ought to be changes, then by all means feel free to let us (the lawyers)know. It was amazing to see how often grammatical errors occurred :p

When moving to other companies, their references were much better than if they had only done what they were asked to do.

bazz

[Vladdy]

Originally posted by bazz
The person compiling the web pages cannot be expected to know what the author of the site wants to say and any thoughts of the 'typist' (now there's a word from the past? ), will usually be seen as wrong when the author sees their changes.

When an entity asks for the development of a web site, they have some ideas about the layout and graphics. A web developer takes these ideas and transforms them into a web site. The amount of work the web developer puts in depends on the quality of the original material he is given (ready to go graphics file or a napkin sketch) and agreement with the client ("I want my web page to look exactly as the file I gave you" or "Here are my thoughts, but I'd like to see your solutions").
Same principles apply to textual content. Big companies may have marketing departments with full-time editors supplying the cut and paste text, while "mom and pop" shops need all the help they can get in presenting their thoughts.

Web developer not being intimately familiar with the details of the information he/she is putting on the web page is actually very helpfull. It allows to view the text from the visitor's perspective and advice the client about modifications ("there are too many details that you are trying to fit on the home page - visitor gets lost" or "you want to be more specific about your service/product here to keep visitors attention")

While ultimate responsibility for the information presented is always the client's, I find it very helpful to be able to offer copywriting services as part of web development.