"Machines aren't replacing proofreaders at all. Copy editors, who proofread and much, much more, use spellcheck as a tool but read every word that appears in the paper"
About this Quote
Walsh is swatting away a familiar techno-panic with the practiced patience of someone who has watched “automation” get oversold for decades. The line is deliberately narrow: not “machines can’t help,” but “machines aren’t replacing proofreaders at all.” The insistence on “at all” is a hard stop, and the next move is even more pointed: he upgrades the job title. Not proofreaders, but copy editors - “who proofread and much, much more.” That repetition is doing political work inside the profession, defending a role that gets flattened by outsiders into typo-hunting.
The subtext is about status and misrecognition. Spellcheck becomes the emblem of the misunderstanding: people see a tool and assume it cancels the craft. Walsh reframes it as augmentation, not substitution. “Use spellcheck as a tool” is a quiet concession to modern workflow, but “read every word” is the non-negotiable human core - attention, judgment, context. Machines can flag “teh”; they can’t reliably catch a legal landmine, a libel risk, a factual wobble, a tone-deaf phrase, or the subtle way a headline changes the meaning of a story.
Context matters: this is an editor talking from inside a newsroom culture that’s been squeezed by speed, shrinking staffs, and the demand to publish now. The quote isn’t nostalgia; it’s a defense of process. Walsh is arguing that credibility is manufactured the old-fashioned way: by someone taking responsibility for every word that makes it to the page, even when software sits on the desk like a tempting shortcut.
The subtext is about status and misrecognition. Spellcheck becomes the emblem of the misunderstanding: people see a tool and assume it cancels the craft. Walsh reframes it as augmentation, not substitution. “Use spellcheck as a tool” is a quiet concession to modern workflow, but “read every word” is the non-negotiable human core - attention, judgment, context. Machines can flag “teh”; they can’t reliably catch a legal landmine, a libel risk, a factual wobble, a tone-deaf phrase, or the subtle way a headline changes the meaning of a story.
Context matters: this is an editor talking from inside a newsroom culture that’s been squeezed by speed, shrinking staffs, and the demand to publish now. The quote isn’t nostalgia; it’s a defense of process. Walsh is arguing that credibility is manufactured the old-fashioned way: by someone taking responsibility for every word that makes it to the page, even when software sits on the desk like a tempting shortcut.
Quote Details
| Topic | Writing |
|---|
More Quotes by Bill
Add to List
