We already mentioned that the press needs to come correct when it writes about Star Wars, comics, and other elements of geek-culture. Add coin collecting to the list. The editorial page editor of the Seattle Post-Intelligencer got slapped down, numismatics style, for a column about coins. He stepped up to correct the errors in a subsequent column:
I'd like to start the New Year by correcting a mistake. Actually two mistakes. A couple of weeks ago I wrote a column and suggested we get rid of paper dollars and instead use coins.
"I read your editorial and found it interesting," wrote a reader. "I find any story about numismatics interesting, primarily because the information contained within is rarely correct. It seems that whenever the price of gold or silver makes any kind of significant move, or a new coin design is forthcoming, the newspapers throw together a story or editorial riddled with inaccuracies. While your editorial was rather tame in that respect, errors were made."
The first error was a dumb one: Nearly a billion Susan B. Anthony coins were produced -- not the million I said. I just looked at the number wrong.
The other error sits on my desk, too. I compared the Susan B. Anthony coin to the Sacagawea -- and said they were different sizes. That's not true. They are the same size (and weight, for that matter) but the gold-toned Sacagawea has a smoother edge with a wide rim. It just looks different.
The column was posted online and immediately I heard from folks who picked up on the misstatements. Of course, e-mail from any reader who talks "numismatics" is a response from someone who's passionate about coin collecting -- and, I assume, someone who knows a great deal about the subject. And that's what's best about the Internet -- there's a large body of knowledge out there, representing people who care deeply about an infinite range of topics...
