Some days ago Clases de Periodismo interviewed me and used one of my sentences for the headline:
“Infographics journalist are often more rigorous than writers".
Some of my writers colleagues have shared with me their disapproval, something I, sincerely, knew that would happen. Of course, this is said ina certain context and is not always true, it's just a generalization. What I wanted to explain is that most of infographics is not treated like information bu writers in many newspapers, meanwhile infographics journalists try to do a journalistic job.
To 'justify' someway this sentence, here you are some examples of sentences I've herad in my short career (here are the sins, but not the sinners):
- "If we would have to check the data there would be no newspapers"
- We have to explain how the bathyscaphe is
- And how it is?
- I don't know, just draw a bathyscaphe
- Infographics journalist: "I need one more year of data"
- Writer: "Just put a little more than the previous year"
- We've got to do a graphic about "...", but we have no data at all.
- Infographics journalist: "So, in order to explain the accident, I need to know where was the car, where the truck, how they crashed..."
- Writrer: "Do we need to know all that? No, no, just draw a crash"
- Writer (after a detailed explanation): "And that is the way the attack happened"
- Infografista: "¿And who is the source"
- Redactor: "Don´t put a source, I'm guessing, but don't worry, I'm pretty sure it was that way"
- "I know that's the real data, but it's not very spectacular... Can't we exaggerate a little?"
- Writer: "If we use the actual data... it's very far from ..."
- Infographics journalist: "But they are very far, that's the information indeed"
- Redactor: "I know, but I think it's better if they're closer"
And the best one...
- "I don't mind the data, but I said just the opposite in my article, so change the graphic or jus delete that data"
Don't worry, all of this problems were solved (not without big fights).