The ACES board decided months ago to create a new award recognizing people or organizations who have contributed so much to ACES and copy editing, and it decided to name it after Hank Glamann, an ACES co-founder and former longtime board member. And the board kept it secret from Hank until Friday night, when the first Glamann Award was given to the Dow Jones Newspaper Fund in its 50th anniversary year.

The presentation of the award followed the Friday night keynote speech by Edward Trayes, co-founder and director of the Dow Jones Newspaper Fund Editing and Minority Intern Program (hmmm, didn’t we arrange that *conveniently*). Trayes had just spoken on the power of copy editors and their enduring presence, and future, no matter how the industry changes. He later accepted the award on behalf of the fund.

The Dow Jones fund has generated hundreds, maybe thousands of quality copy editors over the years—a great many of whom stood up when called upon at Friday night’s banquet. It was the vision of newspaper editors, Trayes said, who believed in supporting generations of budding journalists, and who believed in quality editing. It’s a fine first recepient of the Glamann Award.

Ed Trayes’ speech

Good evening.

Editing and editors have been a big part of my life from an early age. I did not always appreciate nor fully understand who they are and what they do but when looking in the rear-view mirror of more than a half century of working in and walking through news rooms across the U.S., in Mexico, Central and South America, I can think of no other words more appropriate than thank you.

Thank you and others like you who choose one of the most underappreciated yet rewarding callings one can answer.

It happens one step at a time, perhaps beginning with a special high school teacher, a college professor or a mentor and it eventually leads one day to a professional life that demands everything you can give and then some. A sharp editor would have made that last part simply more.

As a co-founder of the Dow Jones Newspaper Fund editing intern training program, I have been fortunate to run more than 50 editing residencies. Each one included about a dozen, sometimes more, young people, undergraduate and graduate students, from across the U.S. Each was selected in a national competition where today nearly a hundred are chosen each year for summer internships at news organizations large and small throughout the country.

For the Temple program those newspapers have included The Wall Street Journal, The New York Times, The Washington Post, Newsday, The Boston Globe and a number of others. Today, and in addition to Temple, there are seven other training sites: Missouri, Nebraska, Penn State, San Jose State, Texas, the University of Central Florida and Western Kentucky University.

These residencies are much like boot camps where the interns develop their editing skills prior to heading out on their own for a summer or at least 10 weeks of editing at a partner news organization. The residencies provide intensive training, often day and night, for two weeks. The partner news organizations do the rest as they not only agree to support intern training expenses but also agree to pay each editing intern the going rate at their news operation.

What an opportunity. What a program. What a wonderful example of journalism at its best in terms of trying to attract and nurture some of the best collegiate journalism talent available and giving them a chance to consider editing at the start(s) of their respective careers.

This has happened since the summer of l968, when pilot programs were run at Temple and Nebraska. Since that time there has been this outstanding partnership that involved The Dow Jones Newspaper Fund, the residency training sites, and the newspapers and news organizations who supported what was from the outset a bold idea: to view editing instead of reporting as a place for at least some to begin their careers in journalism.

Not everyone embraced the idea initially, but the proof came not only in how well so many of the interns did during their summers on copy desks pretty much the length and breadth of this country, but in how many wound up taking full-time editing jobs following graduation. Moreover, it was not uncommon for a news organization to hire someone who had previously served as a Fund editing intern. In other instances, someone who did well in an internship in one part of the country might well have been hired by a participating newspaper elsewhere.

Regardless, what started as an experiment took hold, and over the years the editing program has grown to what it is today: a place where college and university students interested in editing can get a chance to develop their skills and get a first-hand look at what it takes to do the job.

You may know or have heard of some of those who came through the Temple editing residency, recognizing that each program director could offer similar rundowns:

Carl Sessions Stepp, a journalism professor at Maryland and a senior contributing editor of the American Journalism Review, was in that first Temple residency in l968.

A classmate of Carls was Jennie Buckner, who 21 years later, in l989, was named vice-president of news for Knight-Ridder. From l993 until retirement, she was editor of The Charlotte Observer.

Still others include:

Wanda Lloyd, executive editor of the Montgomery Advertiser in Montgomery, Alabama. She was formerly a senior editor at USA Today and more recently executive director of the Freedom Forum Diversity Institute.

DeWayne Wickham, a columnist for USA TODAY and the Gannett News Service. Earlier he was a Capitol Hill correspondent for U.S. News and World Report.

Paul Soucy most recently of USA Today and in 2006 the first ACES/Robinson Prize winner. Paul was joined at that time by another former Temple editing intern, Diego Sorbara, recipient of the ACES-sponsored Aubespin scholarship. Today Diego is on his way to the national desk of The New York Times.

Jay Smith, former publisher of The Atlanta Journal and Constitution, and since then president of Cox Newspapers.

Gina Acosta, editorial page copy editor at The Washington Post, who just completed a year as a Neiman Fellow at Harvard.

Jerry Schwartz, news features editor of The Associated Press, who went from AP intern to AP staffer more than 30 years ago. It is the only place he has ever worked.

Juan Williams, author of Eyes on the Prize and a biography of Thurgood Marshall, went directly from college to the Washington Post where he worked for almost a quarter century in a variety of roles including columnist and White House correspondent. He has an Emmy for television documentary writing. More recently he has worked as a senior correspondent for National Public Radio, Fox News and the Public Broadcasting Service.

There are hundreds more and I am proud of each of them; delighted to have had the privilege to work with them, to help them explore editing as a career possibility.

Just know that today there are literally thousands of Dow Jones Newspaper Fund editing program alumni. Some, perhaps many, are in this room tonight. Many others, wherever they are, continue to edit, continue to follow the path that once included time as a Fund editing intern.

In its half century of service to journalism and the profession, The Dow Jones Newspaper Fund found and placed nearly six thousand college students in reporting and editing internships. In addition, The Fund provided workshop opportunities for roughly thirteen thousand high school students and fellowships for about five thousand high school journalism teachers and advisers.

One piece of this decades-long story is the part so many of you past and present have played personally to make this happen. You have done this as slots, as experienced copy editors, as news room managers. You and yours have welcomed 40 years of editing interns, worked with them, trained them, and shown them by example as well as shared intellect what it takes to do what is arguably the most important job in journalism: making sure that whatever gets published is, among other things, true, accurate, fair.

There is so much to know about copy editing and copy editors—and it can only be understood one person at a time. For while there is a common core, I have found no two copy editors to be quite the same. And while there is a standard of excellence in editing, it seems that each editor brings a set of attitudes and values that count way more than the number of zeros on a pay check. There are far easier ways to make a living, yet for some there is no other option; for them, no other choice. Make them the keepers of what journalism must stand for in a free society. Now more than ever.

Copy editors I know do not quit and will not be marginalized. Their ownership transcends the brick and mortar, the presses, the online venues. Their ownership lives and breathes in the power, yes power, they wield every day as they choose one word over another, one story over another, in an effort to let readers know enough about their worlds so they might make better, more informed choices, live better lives. This alone is a gift no one should ever take for granted. Again, the words that fit best are these: Thank you.

Copy editing is not an easy job. Instead it is an unending challenge where in most cases the editor and reader never meet. Yet the trust is there day in and day out in a business where perfection is the ideal, but not the reality; where just doing ones best sometimes is just not good enough, and where sometimes credibility is damaged through no fault of our own. Where else are yesterdays misses part of today’s news?

Credibility and integrity, standing for something, can not be overrated especially in journalism, especially with those who make the call regarding what the rest of the world reads or does not read; for this is power indeed. And while we know it, perhaps we do not fully appreciate it—perhaps we do not use it well enough or in the right ways. Perhaps we no longer think that what we do truly matters. Perhaps we are tired of standing up and instead step down, becoming more acquiescent—less engaged in ones craft, ones calling.

Thankfully, the editors I know, and I know a number of you, are just the kinds of people needed to keep journalism—journalism. Smart, confident, capable and fair. Dedicated to doing the right thing. Not looking for a pat on the back as much as for the next big hole that needs to be plugged in a story.

Editing has come a long way, even from 50 years ago. And in that time there are some people I would like to mention who helped lay some of the foundation on which we build today:

Barney Kilgore, an editor and later publisher of The Wall Street Journal, who had the idea of starting The Newspaper Fund in the late l950s in an effort to promote careers in journalism.

Paul Swensson, for 10 years managing editor of Minneapolis Star and Tribune newspapers before becoming the second executive director of The Dow Jones Newspaper Fund in l961. It was Paul who came up with the editing intern program idea.

Tom Engleman, who succeeded Paul at The Fund, is to be credited for seeing things through and building the editing program as well as running The Fund for so many years.

Today the Funds team includes Rich Holden, for years an editor at The Wall Street Journal; Linda Shockley and Phil Avila. They travel throughout this nation in behalf of journalism education and the profession.

Pam Robinson is no stranger to you as a founder and past president of this organization. I also know her as a talented editor as well as one who has done much to encourage and train others in editing.

Merrill Perelman and Bill Connolly of The New York Times are outstanding examples of talented editors who continue to do so much to grow the next generation of journalists, particularly those who edit.

Ann Glover, of The St. Petersburg Times, for all the years I have known of her has lived and breathed being an editor, a copy editor, a journalist—one who writes effectively and knowingly about what it takes to do what she and you do so well.

John Bremner, a distinguished journalism professor at the University of Kansas, and for many years my friend, touched many who work in the world we share, the world of words.

John in the last 20 years of his life, he passed in l987, became widely known for his efforts to sharpen the skills of editors on the job as well as those of students who thought that someday they might like to go there as well.

Those who knew him would agree that he had high, if not rigid, editing standards. He had expectations to match when it came to his teaching, his work in professional seminars and on-site consultations across the country. John cared. John cared deeply about journalism, but especially about editing.

We miss him, Paul Swensson and many other like-minded individuals who valued copy editors, the importance of editing, and the ability to use the right words in just the right ways.

Fortunately, we have all of you and others like you who share the idea that copy editors matter more than a little.

That publications must publish, and that so much of the responsibility for this falls to you and individuals who do what you do in places large and small across the United States and elsewhere.

This is not a time to be down on ourselves, our calling, while so much change blows across the world of journalism as we know it today.

So much of this unsettling change is driven by technology. Technology that has its pluses and minuses. Technology that enables some people to wait for news to come to them rather than their going out and finding it, reading it, and taking the best of what is offered to help them lead better, more informed, possibly more fulfilling, lives.

Perhaps two quotes from a recent New York Times story give some helpful insight. It is an article on how young people use online technology in terms of political news: If the news is that important, it will find me. Another said, Id rather read an e-mail from a friend with an attached story than search through a newspaper to find the story.

All of this points not only to how technology is being used but to how at least some people, make that a lot of people under 30, tune in to their self-defined worlds of what is important and what is not.

There is competition from the Internet and other all-news-all-the-time venues. Everything we do seems to compete with everything else. So often the competition is we ourselves, for it includes newspapers and other print publications who slice and dice their content and present it in any number of ways, at any time, online and off line, thus casting an information net intended to reach all manner of audiences—often going broader and broader looking for numbers while at the same time making it possible for consumers to focus narrowly and to the exclusion of what otherwise could be a richer diet of news, other information and entertainment.

And it is, for the most part, free—to the consumer—the reader, the viewer.

Try giving away newspapers and other paid circulation publications. I’m thinking there would be more than a few takers, that perhaps it could be one of the boldest, some might say heretical, moves a publisher or news organization could make but in some cases it is worth considering, worth trying. For when audience penetration numbers go south, there is a point where advertisers look for alternative media. I’m not saying this would work in all situations, or even in many or a majority of situations, but perhaps in some. Perhaps in some way.

At my train station in suburban Philadelphia there is in the center of the platform a green box loaded with certainly hundreds of free daily newspapers. By around 9 a.m. they are gone, yet still the commuters come, flip down the front panel of the box, find nothing and walk away disappointed. Nearby are at least six other boxes, all with daily newspapers waiting to be purchased. Even the disappointed do not seem to go there, to dig deep for some quarters for the privilege of grabbing a newspaper.

Sometimes, when waiting for the train, I sit near the free box and watch the people come, all manner of people, just the kinds of people who ought to read newspapers. Coffee or a bagel in one hand, now a free newspaper in the other. Sometimes I have closed my eyes and listened to the steady drumbeat, the thump-thump, of that free newspaper box being opened and lightened, opened and emptied. On the train, it seems very much like the old days with many there reading newspapers—some are the traditional or more specialized ones, a great many more are the much smaller one from the green box, the one that has only one consumer cost: Time.

Today there is not enough time for us to do everything we would like to do, need to do, must do. There’s work, school, children, Dancing with the Stars—so many things that take time. So much so that some things must go. And it wont be the job—and lets hope it isn’t the children—perhaps it will be Bruno. This means working out lifestyles and strategies that will mesh in a multitasking world.

The commuter paper has a short but useful life. It is not for everyone, yet it grows, thrives even, because people want to read it for any number of reasons. Cost and availability are two. Lets hope content is there as well.

Turn around today in almost any given corner of the country and the competition for an individuals time includes publications with new(er) technology presences—many in a race sometimes with themselves to try to maintain or grow print circulations while recognizing that they may not be reaching a majority of their potential readership, that there are so many out there who live their lives and spend their time so differently from even a decade ago. I call this a 21st Century time-warp where things happen so fast and then change—again and again—all within what used to be a twelve- or twenty-four-hour news cycle. Today, in some instances and in the online world, this news cycle is less than an hour and perhaps more like twelve or twenty-four minutes. Probably less.

Technology as it relates to journalism, as it influences how news is gathered, edited and presented as well as how readers read what we have to say, will not kill us. As long as there are words to be written, there will be copy editors with whatever at the time is the technological equivalent of a sharp pencil

With this in mind, technology and the lifestyles of today, how people choose to get news and information, how they choose to spend their time, will change us.

The green eye shade of another era is pretty much gone, but the best of that time lives on—in you. You would not be here, miles from home, attending a national convention of professional editing colleagues, if it did not. Even this, a national convention of copy editors, was not even a thought when newspaper and magazine circulation numbers were at their height. What a great idea Pam Robinson, Merv Aubespin (Awww-bis-pin), Lynn Louie (another Temple editing intern), Hank Glamann (Glayyy-man), Bill Cloud, and a number of others had more than a dozen years ago.

Copy editors know about change. It is the theme of this convention. And anyone who has been in or around the slot for much of the past half century will tell the rest of you how much change there has been especially in regard to how news is edited and presented. Arguably no area of print publication has changed as much as the copy desk as it moved from hard copy/sharpened pencil/paste pot/scissors and just maybe a manual typewriter to all the whistles, zippers and bells of today. No journalists job has changed more than the copy editors—and no group has handled change better, been more nimble—ever going forward, ever adapting, succeeding.

Charles Handy is a widely known organizational theorist. He writes about those who try to face the future and inevitable change while walking backwards into it, thus allowing them to continue to look at and hold on to familiar things, the known, for as long as possible until they eventually drop over the far horizon and are no longer in view.

Copy editors have a history of facing forward. Copy editors have engaged massive changes in the past 50 years and are still here, perhaps stronger than ever, and still facing forward into the next waves of change as they begin to break. It is up to each of you to meet the challenges as they come while taking an active role in determining what copy editors can and must do in the years ahead. You have a right to participate, you must claim a say, in whatever decisions are made, whatever strategies are employed, as they affect editors and the all-important editing process. Continue to face forward. Do not miss this opportunity. Seize it.

For at least some of you, if not most of you, the next great battle is online editing. Editing for Web sites and other venues must have the same standards as print. There is no doubt about copy editing being under attack in this area. Perhaps this is an effort to marginalize what is done and those who do it by those who neither fully understand nor fully appreciate all that copy editors do, and can do. Perhaps it is at least in part an effort to economize, to save money. Regardless, this can not happen. This is not acceptable; for every writer needs an editor. Every publication, online and otherwise, needs editors.

If ever there were a time to speak out against such wrongheaded and sometimes insidious thinking, it is now. And you must get out of your comfort zones to do this, collectively and individually, not only because you believe in yourselves and what you do, but more importantly for what it means to practice good journalism each and every day—because readers, online and otherwise, count on, depend on, what copy editors pass along as true, accurate, and fair.

Thank you.

Smith was clearly shocked and surprised -- that was obvious even through the rough video feed prepared in advance by Daniel Hunt of the ACES board and the tech people at the Chronicle in Georgia. The video feed, the trophy and $3,000 check shipped to the Chronicle ahead of time, the simple news that he won all had been kept secret from Smith for weeks.

Contest chairman Jim Montalbano addressed the Friday night banquet in a precisely timed event leading up to the big reveal, whereupon a widely smiling Adam Smith appeared on two large screens. Eventually, Adam spoke through his shock well enough to thank ACES and the crowd he could see applauding for him through a monitor on his end.

Smith couldn't be at the ACES conference this week because of the coverage of the Masters going on right in town. But his colleagues arranged for him to take time out from the busy deadline work to receive the prize; we in Denver could hear them cheering for him in the room they had gathered in around the monitor.

Smith is the third recipient of the award that focuses on excellence over the whole range of skills and contributions in editing. The prize, which is named for ACES co-founder and past president Pam Robinson, includes a trophy and $3,000.

A panel of seven judges noted that Smith’s “all-around excellence in editing, design, project work, deadline skills and education/outreach impressed the judges, who couldn’t find a hole in his game. While the other candidates were strong, Adam quickly rose to the top of each judge’s first ballot.”

In the 10 years that Smith has worked at the Chronicle, he has complemented his daily editing skills by updating the newspaper’s stylebook, creating headline and cutline writing guides and producing the WriteThru, an in-house style publication that points out editing successes and failures among training capsules.

“Our small newsroom sees many unseasoned copy editors who require immense basic training,” said Chronicle Presentation Editor Traci Long. “Adam seizes teachable moments, offering on-deadline instruction and explaining the nuances of our craft in a memorable and thoughtful way.”

John Gogick, Chronicle news editor, noted Smith’s creativity in editing as well as in his approach to training.

“One day he blew me away with his ‘Camptown Ladies’ rendition,” Gogick wrote in a letter of recommendation. “He had copy editors singing ‘doo dah’ to find the perfect rhythm for their heads. Adam turned that ditty and an idea on four headline drivers into a wonderfully instructive piece for Dow Jones summer copy editing interns.”

Smith “consistently has been the most versatile and reliable member of the copy desk, equally adept at breaking down complicated news stories to increase readers’ understanding as he is at designing sports pages to engage our readers,” said Long. “Adam’s creativity … sets him apart. He is not afraid to take editing risks, within text and in design, which consistently inject our pages with personality and an element of surprise.”

Smith is considered a major contributor to the Chronicle’s award-winning Masters Tournament coverage, both as a coordinator for the Masters preview and daily sections and in his creation of a day-in-review page, which combines graphic elements and synopses to recap each day on the golf course.

Colleagues noted his willingness to step in to get a story to readers. “When the Metro desk did nothing for a month with a hold-for-release BRAC report, Adam read and edited it down for a front-page package summarizing our area’s good, bad and ugly. It was a tremendous piece of editing, both in quality and quantity,” Gogick noted.

“Adam shared a corporate innovation award for the Backstory box,” Gogick wrote. “The Backstory box is a copy desk-driven initiative to recapture the franchise of national/international news. Adam was instrumental in helping add context and meaning to stories ‘readers could get anywhere.’ Readers look for these stories (and boxes) in our paper. The day Scooter Libby was indicted, more than one reader called, asking whether we were going to have ‘one of those things to tell me what the news means to me’ in tomorrow’s paper.”

Gogick’s description captures the focus of the Robinson Prize:

“Adam has been my right-hand man and leader of the night copy desk the past four years. I trust him to act in my stead implicitly. Adam resolves conflicts, makes copy better, writes great heads, takes risks with design, enforces style and uses sound, well-reasoned news judgment. The most important thing he does: Uphold our standard ‘Think like readers, act like editors.’ ”

Judges were Tim Lynch (Los Angeles Times), Holly Franko (The Oregonian), Bill Cloud (University of North Carolina), Jim Montalbano (University of New Mexico), Paul Soucy (most recently of USA Today), Maureen Cotter (Chicago Sun-Times) and Naomi Seldin (Albany Times Union).

This week, we'll have more pictures from the ceremony, as well as an audio interview with Smith shortly after he was given the award.

The winners of the 2007 ACES headline contest, announced April 10, include four previous honorees, two of whom won last year.

Michael Roehrman of the Wichita Eagle won Division III (circulation of 50,001 to 100,000) for the second year in a row. And 2007 was, in fact, his third win.

The New York Times was a repeat winner in Division V (staff entries from publications of any size), having won the category in 2004. Staff entrants this time included Greg Cowles, this year's first-place winner in Division I (more than 250,000 circulation). The paper also won an honorable mention in 2006 in Division V.

Two previous honorees won again as part of the staff entry from The Los Angeles Times, which was recognized with an honorable mention in Division V. They are the 2006 Robinson Prize winner, Tim Lynch, and the 2006 Division I first-place winner, Rachel Dunn.

Other individual winners were: in Division II (circulation between 100,001 and 250,000), Matthew Crowley of the Las Vegas Review-Journal, first place, and Panfilo Garcia of the Austin American-Statesman, honorable mention; in Division III (circulation of 50,001 to 100,000), Ashley Winchester of the Connecticut Post, honorable mention; and in Division IV (circulation 50,000 or less), Gary Housey of the West Paterson (N.J.) Herald News, first place.

In the student publications category, Katie Michael of the University of Oregon Daily Emerald won first place, and an honorable mention went to Audrey Kuo from the UCLA Daily Bruin.

A total of $2,250 in cash prizes was awarded in the contest, along with plaques and certificates. The headline entries were published between Dec. 1, 2006, and Nov. 30, 2007. Judges were not allowed to discuss or vote on entries from their own paper or school.

Two Floridians had their first snow days on the opening day of the Denver conference. Eileen Cukier, a South Florida native, and Beth Slater, a North Florida native, were eager to get outside while ACES members from the Northeast, Midwest, and other wintry locations groaned about the cold, wet precipitation.

Eileen and Beth ventured outside a number of times before lunch to build snow men, have snowball fights and otherwise look upward in wonder at the beauty of little white pieces of water. It was cold, for sure, but it was lovely and exciting, too.

Thanks, Denver, for giving two Florida girls something the Miami conference could not.

Thanks, Beth, for sharing your conference moments. If you have something to say, send it to acesdenver@gmail.com. And you can see more photos from Andrew and Beth on our Flickr site.

This is not the last post about the conference, by any stretch of the imagination, but it’ll be a few days before I, myself, and the others who dedicated their free time and laptops to blogging will be updating the site—on a lack of rest. To all who came to ACES this year: thank you. You are the reason we will continue to make this conference for, by and about you. Good night!

Here’s what Jim Thomsen had to say about Saturday’s wrap sessions.

BEST. CLOSING. PARTY. EVAH. Well, at least in the three years I’ve been going to the conferences. Was it Hank Glamann’s spot-on spit-out of “Rapper’s Delight”? Was it Scott Toole’s gangsta strike-a-poses? Maybe Gerri Berendzen’s headbanging hair-shaking during “Livin’ On A Prayer”? Or a nameless someone’s too-unsexy take on “I’m Too Sexy”? Or was it every move Katie Schwing made? Whatever your favorite moment, whoever had the idea to pack some 70-80 copy editors into a tiny Japanese karaoke bar for five hours should be granted a lifetime ACES membership. I’ve never had so much freaking fun in my life. Do we collective rock the casbah and shock the monkey? Never doubt it. The love flowed like cheap beer, and I am content to marinate in it for the next year. Safe travels to all, and thank you for being ... well, just thank you for being.

I have better than 500 pictures taken at Saturday night’s festivities. It’s going to take me a few days to edit, select and upload the best ones ... so please check back on the ACES conference Flickr site sometime late next week for dozens of wonderfully embarrassing images.

I still have that enthusiasm, and I hope they’ll keep it for years to come, too. I’ve talked to several people who’ve asked how they can contribute to the organization, and some who have great ideas for keeping the good feeling going.

For instance, some of the people who attended the small staffs roundtable are talking about getting an informal e-mail group together so copy editors working in a situation where there’s no one to bounce off of will have a discussion group. Nothing too difficult, just people with similar situations sharing a friendship developed in Denver over a passion for good copy editing.

Anyone who might be interested in joining us can e-mail me at gberendzen@comcast.net.

I’d also encourage people to read, post and respond on the ACES bulletin board. It’s a great way to share.

We’re going to make it to Minneapolis next year. Hope you can, too.

Plus check out copydesk.org for any regional or chapter events that might be coming up. For instance, the Florida chapter is planning an event in June, and more one-day events are being discussed.

Thanks for coming to Denver (with the snowfall)! And keep in touch.

Let’s skip No. 1 for now and talk about No. 2. For a publication of any size, using a stylebook matters because readers notice inconsistency, and it makes them question other areas of the publication’s work, like accuracy. If you’re so careless with the name of a local agency, how do we know you aren’t careless with the details of the story?

It also matters because spending all of your time hashing out the little things in every story takes time away from looking at the bigger issues. If the desk has a source about abbreviations, copy editors can look up their questions quickly and move on.

Saturday morning, Bill Connelly gave people in the Creating and Maintaining an In-house Stylebook session a quick look at how any staff can go about creating one — how to gather and research the material, how to settle disputes and how to keep it fresh.

It was great material, and necessary. But I have to admit that as a person interested in technology (and, for disclosure purposes, a member of the panel who spoke on the need for smaller publications to take the time to create a stylebook), I was most fascinated by the stylebook databases displayed by Joe Hudson of the Denver Post and Sue Blair, retired desk chief of TIME magazine.

The Post’s stylebook is searchable by alphabet and category and accounts for misspellings of words in the search field. (That’s something small publications that keep their files in some sort of Word document might struggle with.)

He showed two really neat things — a calculator section that has fill in-the-field formulas for everything from percentage change to odds, and a clickable map of Iraq that offers a lot of detail, information and spellings.

I’m not sure my publication needs the Iraq map, but doing something like that with a map of our coverage area would be an excellent idea.

Which brings me to Sue’s part of the presentation. She created her own database in a project she was working on for TIME’s stylebook. Joe maintains his paper’s online stylebook, but he had a tech person at the newspaper build the database. For small publications, such as weeklies with one copy editor and some smaller magazines, having a tech person do that (or buying the AP online customizable version) may not be in the cards. But getting hold of a copy of Filemaker Pro like Sue did and creating your own database is doable — I think regardless of your computer skills.

What it will take is time. But having a local stylebook — whether it is a softbound book or just a few pages of addendums to the AP Stylebook — is a good idea for any publication or any staff that is doing copy-editing work.

Oh, and as to No. 1, I think you can all figure out some good responses to that!

It means that there are a tremendous number of people out there who are still hungry for training, who want to improve how they do their jobs. And they know this is a great place to come and get it.
It also means, as Hank pointed out (surprise) over drinks at the bar last night, that a tremendous percentage of people here have not been exposed to the workshops on basics—how to write solid headlines, reminders about core editing principles and the like—that we have offered year after year.
This year a couple of those are on hiatus, but we’ve got others on the schedule that are perennial favorites—Merrill Perlman’s “If I Knew Only” and Bill Connolly’s “Jimmy’s World” come to mind.
The number of first-timers here constitutes a good argument for continuing to keep these warhorses in our stable even as we look to the future in others and, in still others, target our more specialized constituencies. Maybe we can’t be everything to everybody. But we sure can try.

Want to know how to put on your very own ACES conference panel? Follow these easy steps:

Several months before conference
You receive an e-mail from ACES VP Deirdre Edgar asking if you’re willing to be on a panel. Because it’s Deirdre asking, you cannot say no. (Hi, Deirdre!)

Two weeks before conference
Get in touch with your fellow panelists and begin talking about what your session is going to cover.

One week before conference
Resolve to come up with new, different, totally awesome and engaging topics for your session. Jot down ideas on paper from a note cube. Realize days later you can’t read your own handwriting. Pack slip of paper with your stuff for ACES anyway.

First day of conference
Promise yourself you’ll work on session ideas on the flight to Denver. Actual outcome: Spend the flight dozing, trying to find something interesting on your iPod and cursing the clouds that are blocking the view during the descent into Denver.

Day of session
Hurried meeting over lunch to discuss plans. Come up with something resembling an outline.

Session time
Pray for audience participation. Lots of it.

You did it!
Hey, you had it in the bag all along. And if it didn’t go so well? Relax, there’s always another conference next year.

It wasn’t enough to place yellow cards on the banquet tables to seek donations to the Education Fund, which its board (with lots of help from ACES the parent) is trying to make a self-sustaining source of annual scholarship money. No, Merill Perlman thought to make a competition out of it.

The two tables that could round up the most donations would get lovely prizes—an ACES lunch cooler for everyone at the table, or an assortment of New York Times merchandise. Perlman’s table (hmmmm) started the bidding with $575. Education Fund President Bill Connolly challenged all the other tables to beat that. When he came back to the podium 15 or so minutes later, the $575 was quickly eclipsed. Then it became a sort of live auction: $635, $750, $1,000, $1,025 ... $1,400, $1,525 ... and finally $1,750 edging $1,740, Table #4 over Perlman’s Table #19.

In the end, the fundraising brought more than $12,000 for the Education Fund, thousands more than the conference has generated for the fund in each of the years past. The Ed Fund board couldn’t be more excited! Another couple of years of this, and we can reach our goal of becoming self-sustaining—and then working on other education projects for budding and existing copy editors.

I must recognize the two winning tables. At Table #4: Anita Crone, Jim Lexa, Candy Mount, Missy Prebula, Scott Toole and Christine Yee. At Table #19: David Brindley, Holly Franko, Karen Giglio, Tracy Koontz, Merrill Perlman, John Russial, David Sullivan, James Tehrani, Janice Ward.

And a big thank you to *all* the donors. Each and every one of you are important (is important?) to the future of copy editing.

Link to session information and handout.

The idea of leaving the copy desk for a corporate job, a trade publication or (gasp!) public relations might leave some of us cold.
But as the newspaper industry changes, and yes, shrinks, it is always a good idea to know what is out there and how to go after it.

The panelists started off with some tips on how to position yourself for life outside the newsroom.

- Know the business you are applying for. We all are good researchers in our copy editing jobs. We can use this to our advantage by finding out about a company before we apply.

- Tailor your resume to the job you want and use the jargon of that industry. This again involves some research to learn that jargon.

- Tell them what you have to offer. We have valuable skills that can be applied in many different jobs.

- We are all smart, talented and passionate about what we do. We can take those traits to just about any industry. The key is to be realistic, but not to limit yourself.

- Think about what you enjoy and then think about how you can apply that to a job.

- Don’t look at editing just in terms of newspapers. Think about other ways information is disseminated. There are trade publications, corporate publications, business-to-business publications.

- Think about your skills. Can you do anything to brush up on them or add new ones.

Doug asked if there were non-newspaper people in the audience.

Turns out there were several.

Some are doing freelance work for newsletters and Web sites.

One works for a health care company.

I lost count, but there were somewhere between four and 64 people from ReMax. Which puts out a pretty slick looking newspaper for its agents twice a year and maintains a Web site that changes daily.

There also was Debbie Andreen. When she mentioned that she worked for the San Diego Zoo, there was an audible “wow” from someplace in the audience.

Debbie went on to explain that while she did have a journalism degree, she had actually started with the zoo as a bus driver. She also did tours and then began writing content for the zoo Web site.

Finally, seeing the need for editing on the site, Debbie offered to do it. She also gathered content from other zoo workers to help beef up the site.

Debbie also has begun editing news releases for the zoo.

When asked if she had any journalism training, Debbie said she has a degree in journalism, but has not worked in a traditional journalism format.

As Kay pointed out, Debbie had created her own job. A feat that got her a round of applause.

I love what I do. I hate to think of copy desks shrinking or going away completely.

But it was heartening to learn that there are other ways to use these skills.

And while I may not go right home and start rewriting my resume, it did open my eyes to the possibilities that are out there.

Click here to go to the handout.

Travis Henry discussed YourHub.com, which he was involved with until recently. One of the things that might cross the minds of those who have worked for super-small community newspapers is that this is just that kind of paper online (and the Denver YourHub actually makes a portion of its money with a print version, Henry said.)

In a 21st century way, it reminds me of the weekly my grandmother got in her town of 50 people — someone from the community wrote up all the gossip, who was at a neighbor’s house for dinner, and which Johnny got a big hit in last week’s Legion game. Then they called it in to the small town publisher.

Now that neighbor is just posting the same sort of stuff directly to a site like YourHub. Take out the community forums and this sort of enterprise looks a lot like turning back a clock.

I’m not knocking it. It’s been popular for decades and is still popular in hundreds of rural areas in the nation. Community journalism will always have a place in the picture, and online hyperlocal sites have been proved to be popular.

What does seem different is the idea of the desk as a moderator of community discourse on the Web. Doug does this on his Hartsville Today site. He calls it being a “troll whisperer,” essentially being the Emily Post of online forums, but in a laid-back, 2008 sort of way.

There were several people in the audience who do this now for a living and understand the ideas of working behind the scenes to keep things civil and letting the online community police itself. It seems like it could be an interesting job, but it doesn’t seem like copy editing as we know it.

In fact, one audience member asked Doug, “but what does this have to do with copy editing.” He gave a fairly direct answer — it’s a job that will be there when your copy editing job is gone. It’s a new world for those used to working with grammar and holes in stories.

Doug’s advice to copy editors is to create “new world” opportunities for themselves. This one won’t be for everyone, but it is one of the opportunities out there.

Scott Butterworth even sounded optimistic about the Post’s new editing policy, which he says began this week.

He said it was a rough first couple of days, but not because of the new system itself. It depends on copy moving earlier, and on Monday it was delayed a bit as the Post celebrated its Pulitzer wins—high-class problems. Aside from such things, indeed the timeliness of the copy will be key, because the system depends on some night copy editors being moved to earlier shifts (and now being called “assistant editors,” you may recall) and, of course, the copy getting online quickly. If material is getting produced earlier and then copy-edited earlier, then the night workload will decrease along with the night staffing levels, and things will work OK. If the stories are just as late as they used to be, creating a backlog of work for the night crew, then there will be a problem. Stand by for results.

Meanwhile, the Post editor was not bothered by copy editors shifting to daytime assistant editors because it’s good, he says, to get copy editors involved in the story-editing process earlier, and certainly to get stories copy-edited before they go online. As for the two-touch rule, where most copy gets only one copy-desk-level read? He said yes, assigning editors do that “first touch” and suggest a headline that really has to be workable, and then the copy editor slots it, and that’s that. He said it puts the onus on reporters and assigning editors to get their facts right, and therefore the copy should be cleaner when it comes to the desk. The big, front-page stories, meanwhile, still will get all the touches they did before.

All this Scott explained rather optimistically, not much skepticism in his demeanor at all. He did concede on Friday that it *is* scary, but he insisted it’s also exciting. Reinvention has to happen periodically, and it’s always frightening but also can be cool. Copy editors will learn new skills, he says, and in the end remain an important part of journalism.

I’ll be eager to hear how it’s going in the coming weeks.

Looking for the traditional grammar, usage, style options? There was Merrill Perlman and Bill Walsh.

Looking for solutions to new age copy-editing concerns? Doug Fisher led a session on Web 2.0, while Chris Wienandt talked about search engine optimization.

How about some nitty, gritty content discussion? Charles Delafuente talked about libel, Bill Cloud (despite technical problems) covered math questions, and Kathy Schenck discussed what editors need to know about polls.

I spent time in the libel session (it’s a favorite topic of mine and one that any copy editor that ever looks at cop stories should attend).

I learned at least one new word from Merrill (I must have missed the day that fulsome was on my “Word A Day” calendar) and now have a nice handout to give to the reporter who is bothered when I edit “hone in on” out of his copy.

And I ended the day in the session on search engine optimization. I work at a small newspaper and the people who do the Web posting are the copy editors. (I’m proud to say we have an “edit first” rule, too.) We’re posting a lot of stories before print, and I have been curious about what would make those stories easier to find in cyberspace.

I came away with the idea that when we write Web heads we ought to think like a reader who doesn’t know the story, instead of like an editor who just read it. If I see an accident at Eighth and Broadway, I’m not so likely to know that two people died. So “Two die in accident” is not what I’m going to search for. What I know is where it happened, so I ought to get that in the head (or the meta tag, at least).

Maybe that’s not the take everyone had on it, but that’s how my mind works.

Also, I learned that the tech people better teach Herald-Whig copy editors about meta tags!

Overall, I learned several new things on Day 1. And isn’t it always a good day when you can say you learned something new.