Having a curious mind is a good trait for a journalist to possess yet there are many things that will always remain unknown. I came across one such mystery in the poynter forums this week.
The subject in this link is debated by professional journalists and editors who see it daily, making it even more mysterious that its origin is unknown.
The forum question is about the meaning of the editor’s mark ‘CQ.’ The mark is used in practical terms during the editing process to confirm that details of a story have been verified. For example, when an editor has verified the quoted person named Smith is not actually supposed to be spelled Smyth. The mark CQ is then written next to the questionable phrase or item to show that it is correct.
Some professionals responded with the meaning they'd been taught for the abbreviation. Possible explanations for CQ included; correctly quoted, correct but quaint, chequed or the archaic spelling of checked, cannot question or other combination of c and q.
What are the origins and meaning of the mysterious CQ?
3 comments:
Why is my question. What's the need for that? The English language is already too confusing as it is why add another math problem to the test? It doesn't even have a legit meaning.Come on people.
This editing technique seems a little pointless.With all the editing techniques they already have, this one seems be redundant.There are already ways for editors and journalists to revise papers that have been used for many of years without using this mystery mark.
This is completetly ridiculous. To me, editing should be done any fair and bold way possible, as long as the editor and writter agree. This whole process would like be changing the whole way one does long division or factoring, only different steps to get the same answer. POINTLESS!!
Post a Comment