Tragic words

I don't usually distance myself from the work of a group I belong to irrespective of how bad its product has come out to be. I might not take it well, but I don't dissociate. Second, if my work is going to appear in a publication—like a magazine or a newspaper—and if I'm working to give it a measure of quality that reflects how important it is to me, then I'm going to expect that those who are working to get their work published in the same forum respect my work for what it is and ensure that their product is just as good. Third—and I simply don't get why some people think this is unimportant—professionalism matters a lot.

Which is why when I read SS's piece in this week's 'The Word', I was pushed to dissociate myself from it, I was ready to not receive any feedback (that I'd been hoping for) on my analytical piece that I really enjoyed writing, and I decided that professionalism, unfortunately, couldn't be taught to some people. Have a look at it. In fact, you could spend some time finding the various errors on it - including plagiarism (Errors, not mistakes. Mistakes are not made habitually, whereas errors, by comparison, are irreparably systematic).

I understand it's an in-house publication, but that's no excuse to begin Hazarika's obituary with a lead that is colloquial enough to point at the goings-on in the Asian College of Journalism, to take up an informal tone in the same neighbourhood as other works that fight to show off purpose and dedication. I can only hope that in future editions of 'The Word', the editing process is more transparent and accountable, and that the editors themselves are mindful of how important such opportunities are.