Sources occasionally ask our reporters and editors if they can see our stories prior to publication.
Politicians most often make the request, but we have also received this question from elected officials of various organizations, conference participants, researchers and farmers in the field.
Sometimes people refuse to be interviewed if they can’t see the typed words before they appear in the paper.
Our policy is to not allow sources to see the stories. If there are any quotes or facts that reporters want to double-check, they will contact the sources and perhaps read back the quotes or parts of the story. If the story or graphic is very technical, we may be a bit more liberal.
Read Also
Late season rainfall creates concern about Prairie crop quality
Praying for rain is being replaced with the hope that rain can stop for harvest. Rainfall in July and early August has been much greater than normal.
Why do we have this policy?
The concerns sources have are that they may be misquoted, taken out of context or the story may be missing key information. One of the main reasons, however, is that the story may be controversial. Seeing the written quote may make sources want to retract or alter their statements.
It is for the latter reason we continue our policy. Otherwise, news sources could begin deleting facts or comments to lessen the impact of a statement if they said more than they intended to reveal.
Much time would be taken up sending stories back and forth between sources and reporters. Sources on opposing sides of an issue might demand deletion of the other side’s remarks.
Our code of ethics says that all comments within quotation marks must be exactly as written or spoken, except only for occasional minor grammatical editing that does not change the sense or tone of the quotation.
We trust our staff and regular contributors are professionals and do this.
If our sources feel errors have occurred, they can contact our editors and hold us accountable.
