Feel free to make changes, but not to the byline.

Q:

I am an editor at a smaller publication, and sometimes we find ourselves short on content when deadline rolls around. Every so often, we have to publish poorly-written articles that require extensive editing — even to the point where our copy editor is literally rewriting whole paragraphs and rearranging the structure of the piece. I feel bad because the copy editor is doing so much work while the reporter gets to take credit for the article. Would it be okay to give the copy editor the byline instead, and name the original reporter as a contributor?

A:

Ideally, this situation would never happen.

Ideally, you have more than enough available content every week, and only select the best pieces for publication.

Ideally, you have a strict editorial schedule for your publication and have adequate time to work with a writer and help them revise their piece before your newspaper goes to press.

But, for all of us who have ever spent time in a newsroom, we know that ideal situations are few and far between.

Here’s what it comes down to: It’s a reporter’s job to get the facts, quotes and background and assemble it into a story — it’s your job as editor to make that story look good.

So, no matter how much time you put into editing a piece, the byline should still go to the reporter. Anything else could constitute plagiarism — and not to mention seriously hurt morale.

But, after publication, it is extremely important that you take the time to meet with the writer and go over the changes with them. A writer is obviously going to notice if the article with their byline on it looks nothing like what was submitted, but they may be too embarrassed (or just not care enough) to bring it up. It’s your responsibility to turn this situation into a teaching moment so that it won’t happen again in the future.

You should also have some sort of written submission policy in place that gives you the right to edit a piece for content, just in case the writer does get upset about your improvements.

And, make sure to reward your poor copy editor in whatever way you can — they deserve recognition too, even if it’s not in a byline.

Am I wrong? Anyone have some ideas on how else to deal with this situation? Leave ‘em in the comments.

Need some advice of your own? jQuery will be a semi-regular series where I do my best to answer your questions related to all things journalism (no, not javascript libraries). Send an e-mail or use the contact form in the right sidebar. Your question may be posted on the blog, but all identities and organizations will be kept confidential.

Yes? No? Maybe?

Mashable had an interesting article last week about the 8 Must-Have Traits of Tomorrow’s Journalist.  The post focused heavily on the importance of being more than just a journalist. Tomorrow’s journalists will have to be journalists/programmers/photographers/videographers/designers/social media experts and more, and this Mashable article is just another one driving that point home.

There is one thing I would add to this list of must-haves – a rock solid sense of ethics.

In today’s world of breaking news on twitter and citizen journalism, information may no longer go through an editorial process before reaching the public. While instant access to information as it is happening can be a great thing, it can also change the dynamics of traditional journalism ethics when it comes to reporting.

Tiger Woods coverage aside, a recent example of this is the case of Tearah Moore, a solider from Michigan who tweeted during the shooting at Fort Hood. Tech Crunch has a great article about Moore and what her situation means for citizen journalism.

While this blog is for (hopefully/aspiring) professional journalists, not citizen journalists, it still remains that you have the same opportunity to publish breaking news, and the reality is you are competing with these citizen journalists to remain relevant to readers.

It can be difficult sometimes for a journalist to keep ethics in mind when they are working with a piece of breaking news content – and this will only become more difficult for tomorrow’s journalist.

The best way to act ethically in a difficult situation is to think about what you will do before it actually happens.

• Establish your priorities – Decide now what is most important to you: being first, or being right. If you’re the type that would rather ask for forgiveness than permission, that’s OK, just be prepared to accept whatever consequences may come from that.

• See what others have to say – The Society of Professional Journalists has an entire section of the website devoted to ethics. It’s an excellent resource when you find yourself in a questionable situation, and even has an Ethics Hotline where you can get advice or just talk about what’s going on. You can also look to your mentors for advice. We had a saying in the Chronicle newsroom – ‘What Would Cailin Do?’ -  in reference to our faculty adviser whenever we were facing a tough decision.

• Think hypothetically – I took a Media Ethics class last year, and 80% of the class involved reading/discussing hypothetical ethical situations and working through what we might do, as well as what the possible impacts would be of our decision. While we didn’t always arrive at a good solution, it helped me practice thinking ethically, and makes it easier for me to work through potential problems as a journalist now.

• Get it in writing – When you are able to establish definitive ethical guidelines, write them down. It gives you something to reference when you’re questioning whether or not to tweet that sensitive piece of information you overheard. If you work at a publication, ask what ethical guidelines they have in place.

While it might seem like the role of ethics in journalism is dwindling, it is imperative that “tomorrow’s journalists” keep ethics in journalism for it to maintain any sense of reliability. What role do ethics play in your newsroom? Have any journalists out there faced an ethical dilemma? What was the end result?