Should reporters and editors correct the language of quotations? I'm happy enough to see disfluencies removed, and I'm in favor of charity towards other sorts of speech errors (see also here and here). However, when someone says what he meant to say, I'd rather read what he said than what some reporter or editor thinks he ought to have said. I saw a possible example of journalistic standardization yesterday, in the various renditions of a basketball player's postgame interviews.
In overtime of game 5 of the NBA finals, Detroit forward Rasheed Wallace left Robert Horry unguarded in the final seconds, and Big Shot Bob hit a 3 to win the game for San Antonio. In game 6, Wallace redeemed himself by scoring 7 points in the final few minutes of a game that Detroit won. He also contributed several rebounds and a crucial steal at the end of the game. The post-game interviews made it clear that the contrast was on Rasheed's mind, or at least on his list of talking points.
From the NYT:
"I just made a bonehead play the other night," said Wallace, who finished with 16 points. "I had to put it behind me, it was over with and I had to come to play tonight.
From the Philadelphia Inquirer:
"Even though I did a bonehead play the other night, I just had to put it behind me," Wallace said.
From the Houston Chronicle:
"I did a bonehead play the other night," he said. "I had to put it behind me. It was over with. It was no pressure. I don't feel pressure. I had to do the things I needed to do."
From Inside Hoops:
Q. You said this morning you were talking about the play you made at the end of Game 5 and you said that you were going to be particularly going after it tonight. How emotionally did you approach the game and how do you feel you played?
Rasheed Wallace : Just went at it as another good game. Even though I did a bonehead play the other night, I had to put it behind me. It was over with, just came out and had to play tonight.
And the Toronto Sun:
"I did a bonehead play the other night (leaving the Spurs' Robert Horry open for the winning shot in Game 5), but I had to put it behind me," Wallace said.
(I'll assume that each of these reporters interviewed Rasheed separately and got a slightly different version of the same story, though of course there might have been some group Q&A or even some copying of quotations). Four of these interviews quote Wallace as saying that he "did" a bonehead play, while one quotes him as saying that he "made" a bonehead play. I wonder if that's because his usage is variable, or because one source (the New York Times) made free to correct his choice of verbs? My guess is that the NYT corrected the quote, whether as a matter of policy or because the reporter's linguistic memory just made the switch unconsciouly.
Leaving aside the ethics of modifying a quote, the NYT had good reasons to disagree with Rasheed's choice . In general, you do things but make plays:
| Yahoo | ||
| did a stupid thing | 9,880 |
5,470 |
| made a stupid thing | 41 |
73 |
| did a big play | 5 |
11 |
| made a big play | 9,110 |
4,740 |
Thus Norma Loquendi seems to vote overwhelmingly for the verb choice in the NYT's version of the quote.
On the other hand, this norm is not especially logical or coherent, and its application in this case is unclear. Semantically, performing an action (even as abstract an action as failing to guard someone in the closing seconds of a basketball game) ought to be something that you do, not something that you make. And when you make a play, you're talking about succeeding at something, not neglecting or failing at something. So if Rasheed was putting words together from first principles, rather than slavishly following phrasal fashion, it makes sense for him to have said that he "did a bonehead play".
In the end, I have no idea what was really going on in Rasheed Wallace's head, or in the heads of the NYT's reporter and editors. But when I read a direct quote, I want to be able to trust the journalists to give me the words that the source actually used.
[ Update: Richard Hershberger points out by email that the variant forms of Rasheed's quote, whether with "did a bonehead play" or "made a bonehead play", might well represent different re-imaginings by different reporters rather than slightly different performances by Rasheed himself:
I was interested to read your recent Lanuage Log post on reporting of what Rasheed Wallace actually said. Remember back in 2002 when both Donovan McNabb and Koy Detmer were injured, so A.J. Feeley, the third string quarterback for the Eagles, played several games. In one of these, the offensive line prevented him from being sacked. At the post-game news conference he was jokingly asked if he was going to buy gifts for the linemen, as is sometimes done. He jokingly responded (with the subtext being that as a third stringer he doesn't make much money) with, depending on which newspaper you read:
"On my salary, I'll take them out to Wendy's for a cheeseburger," Feeley said. "Make it a limit of one." (Inquirer)
"With my salary, I'll take 'em out to Wendy's for a cheeseburger," Feeley said, flashing his perfect smile for the cameras. "And they get limited to one...the Happy Meal." (Daily News)
"With my salary," he said, "I can take them all out to Wendy's for dinner. Limit them each to one cheeseburger." (New York Times)This caught my attention because I watched that news conference on TV, and what I read the next day wasn't
what I remembered. So I did a compare-and-contrast and took notes. This was at a formal, recorded news
conference, not serial impromptu interviews in the locker room. Any reporter could have reviewed the tape to get the quote right. It was an additional nail in the coffin of my opinion of the media. It's not bias I worry about: it is competence.
I agree. This case seems harmless -- it's just sports, after all, and the different forms of the quote mean pretty much the same thing. But if journalists present a direct quote, it ought to be a direct quote. And in this day of digital electronic recording devices, it's trivial to get quotes right. The fact that journalists don't bother even to try to do this does seem to be a matter of laziness rising to the level of incompetence. ]
[Update #2 -- Edward Garrett emailed:
You can find postgame interviews from the NBA finals here: http://www.nba.com/finals2005/video.html
I just watched Rasheed Wallace's interview. Inside Hoops has it right. Here's what he said:"Just went at it as another good game. Even though I did a bonehead play the other night, had to put it behind me. It was over with, just came out and had to play tonight."
I've transcribed it differently from Inside Hoops in only one way: I don't think he said the "I" in "I had to put..."
You write:(I'll assume that each of these reporters interviewed Rasheed separately and got a slightly different version of the same story, though of course there might have been some group Q&A or even some copying of quotations)
No, in fact, this isn't how things work. the players are interviewed one after another by the media as a whole, and most of the quotes in articles that you read end up coming from these extended sessions. So it's virtually certain that these guys are all quoting the same quote.
In fact, given Wallace's general disdain for the media, it's unlikely that he said the same thing twice. In today's NY Times, there is an article about him and Duncan that includes the following:Yesterday, for example, Wallace came half an hour late to a scheduled interview feast, where reporters ask the questions we've asked all week and players give the answers they've given all week. Wallace finally arrived, left to change shoes, came back, put his clothes down, then finally came to the podium, where reporters stood with notebooks out, cameras rolling.
He asked what we wanted. Somebody asked what he was listening to.
"Music."
How will San Antonio adjust to Detroit's defense against Duncan? Wallace said that would be the Spurs' problem.
There were a few more questions, but basically the "interview" was over, and there was plenty of grumbling by reporters. Yet, if Detroit wins Game 7, Wallace should be the most valuable player of the finals.
OK, that nails it: journalistic laziness rising to the level of incompetence. I know from personal experience that "quotes" in non-sports stories can sometimes be semi-fabricated to an even greater extent. But the striking thing about these examples is that there's no real point to the fabrication -- they don't make the story better or simpler or clearer. The only value seems to be to save the reporter a few seconds of work. ]
[More here.]
Posted by Mark Liberman at June 23, 2005 07:55 AM