You know what I hate? I hate it when somebody sends out a release on a PDF, and it’s the kind of PDF that won’t let you highlight and copy the text. Meaning you have to retype it to quote it, which not only is a hassle, but leads to a greater chance of making errors. So I end up having to show you a picture of it, like so:
Anyway, here’s the whole PDF if you want to look at it…
There are different versions of .pdf files?
Yep. Some allow you to highlight and grab copy — which is a big help in quoting things accurately — but others do not; for copying purposes they might as well be JPGs. They function more like a picture of a document than a document.
I could probably copy from them all if I had full Adobe Acrobat, but I don’t — I just have the reader…
Frankly, I’ve always wished people would share documents in Word or maybe just as TXT. PDFs are often a pain….
I don’t know what some people do to the text in PDFs that makes it inaccessible. I just know that it happens…
It happens when someone uses software to convert a document to PDF instead of creating a true PDF. It is, as you say, simply an image like a jpg.
Probably because shared in Word means anyone can edit the document.
Possibly. But if that’s why they’re doing it, that’s a pretty stupid reason. Assuming you’re paranoid enough to think a news organization would falsify your document to try to make it appear to say something you didn’t say, you should be paranoid enough to realize that they could simply create a document from scratch and claim it’s from you.
But if the paranoid person has half a brain, he’d realize that aside from the fact that mainstream news organizations have zero motive to do such a thing (despite what Trump’s followers believe), they could never, ever get away with it. You have the original document that you sent. You have the original email you sent, with your version of the document attached to it, to support your version of what happened. If someone subsequently altered it, you’ve caught them red-handed, and you have documentary evidence of what they did.
And anyone with a complete brain would say to himself, “Why am I sending out this release?” It’s because you want what you had to say, EXACTLY as you said it, on the record. If you put the info in a format that makes it easy to copy and paste, your words are FAR more likely to be quoted extensively and accurately. Make the reporter retype what you said, and he’s not only going to quote your version less, but he’s more likely to make a transcription error.
Basically, the point of a press release is to get out what YOU want to say, exactly as you wish to say it. You should make it as easy as possible for that to happen…
But a .PDF keeps everything original, from content to formatting. I’ve received Word documents that changed formatting when I opened them on my computer. By sending it as a .PDF what I send out is how I intended it to be read and used, if you want to cut and crop certain pieces… well that’s your problem to deal with.
What you’re saying is all journalists have a complete brain. And those of the rest of us who don’t feel the urge to post pieces only have half a brain. Well this half-brain is smart enough to realize I can use tools like Microsoft Snipping Tool or Snag-It to grab just the parts I want.
“Basically, the point of a press release is to get out what YOU want to say, exactly as you wish to say it. You should make it as easy as possible for that to happen…”
So, to make sure it’s exactly what I want… I should send it as a .pdf.
Well, that certainly is the way to keep your formatting. If you care how it looks at the other end, go with the PDF, because yeah, formatting can fall apart in other kinds of files.
And while I used to hate all PDFs, I don’t so much now — having scanned a lot of documents to that format myself. I can particularly see advantages, say, when you’re preserving a hand-written document for posterity.
Just please, if you want it quoted, do it the way that lets people copy and paste. Otherwise, you’ve just causing trouble for others and yourself as well…
I just use this website.
Drop in the doc and you get an email with the text.
You probably know this but I’ve found that sometimes its just a matter of toggling the cursor from the grabber hand to the select tool that lets you select text. If you right click any where on the document you get that menu I think.
I know some of them just don’t let you select though. It is very frustrating. I always assumed that was some sort of setting they could choose when making the pdf. but I don’t know.
Just another point about these–those pdf files that you cannot copy and paste from do not meet accessibility standards, and government entities should not be using them.
Should not be using them for digital distribution.
PURC controls appointments to the PSC, reviews ORS and PSC performance, and of course the members influence budgetary decisions affecting those bodies. I hope the PURC members will take seriously the potentially catastrophic consequences for ratepayers should SCANA have continued V. C. Summer construction. Independent analysts are putting total costs for completion in the $24 billion range. I also hope that PURC members will take seriously the need for substantial reform of the regulatory process, including ways in which their body might have contributed to the excessively high tolerance for risk to ratepayers that has characterized the V. C. Summer situation.
As some of the pro-gang-stalkers in the grocery store, et.al. say – ” I’m glad you’re here. ”
A sane and compassionate voice for those of us otherwise occupied. Go Lynn! #!TRUTH!
You know, the whole problem could have been avoided if Catherine Templeton were governor, if the state ran the way she’d like it to. Think how much cheaper the costs would have been to build these nuclear reactors if we had a system built upon slave labor, the sort of economic system Templeton is so “proud of.”