I'm here for the readers: Introducing your man at The Observer

mistake n 1. an error or blunder in action, opinion or judgment 2. a misconception or misunderstanding (Collins Dictionary).

Newspapers make mistakes. They are written and edited against the pressure of deadlines while trying to respond to what Harold Macmillan once wearily described as 'events, dear boy, events'. Each issue of The Observer contains about 200,000 words and while we strive to get things right it would be foolhardy to claim that every one of them is entirely accurate.

Journalists have taken a bullish stance towards mistakes. We work in an ephemeral world; newspapers are the ultimate use-once-and-throw-away product. 'Don't worry - it'll be wrapped around chips tomorrow,' has often been the attitude to our errors.

Not so long ago we could hide behind the convenient smokescreen of the 'printer's error' for straightforward blunders, but we no longer have that excuse. Now journalists are responsible for what appears in front of your eyes; what leaves our computer screens reaches your doorstep. And while the technological advance has given us greater flexibility it has also brought greater opportunity for error. Newspapers are bigger; more pages require more words, more words mean more mistakes.

In an effort to remedy this The Observer has appointed me as an independent Readers' Editor, the first Sunday newspaper to have one. I shall respond to readers' concerns and complaints, compile corrections each Sunday and write a monthly column based on your preoccupations and suggestions.

But before you rush to judgment against the writers, it is worth noting that they are not solely responsible for what you read. While this piece carries my name, it - like everything else in the paper - will have been through several hands before it reaches you. When you throw down the paper in anger and declare that so-and-so doesn't know what he or she is writing about, remember that it may not be so-and-so who made the mistake.

A corrections column is no more immune from error than any other part of the paper, and I am already prepared for the amusement that will greet a correction to a correction, but if we can show you that we care about accuracy, then it will be worth the occasional embarrassment.

Such breast-beating is quite new for the British press (Ian Mayes, who holds a similar post on our sister paper, the Guardian, ploughed a lonely furrow for three years until the Mirror made an appointment recently) but some of the bigger papers in the US have been at it for decades. The Washington Post established an internal ombudsman 31 years ago. Michael Getler is the latest incumbent, who, like me and The Observer , has a long history with his paper in a variety of roles. Writing to wish me well he said: "I think that newsrooms, being the irreverent places that they are supposed to be, don't pay much attention to ombudsmen who just echo reader complaints. But if you can present the issues raised by readers in a way that shows you understand how these errors or biases come about, you make it harder for them to be pushed aside.

"I have great respect for the Post, as I'm sure you do for The Observer, so whatever criticisms I launch are done within the context of a strong newspaper able to absorb my little sniping from the treeline. Newspapers need to be tough and focused and not worry too much about annoying readers. I'm not sure what I say as a critic will last longer than my tenure, but if you love newspapers it is a challenging and engaging job." From tomorrow, with your help, it will be.

Contacting the Readers' Editor

To make a correction, raise an issue about the Observer, or to make suggestions about the role of the Readers' Editor:

Write to:
Stephen Pritchard, Readers' Editor
The Observer, 119 Farringdon Road, London, EC1R 3ER

Tel: 020 7713 4656 Mon-Fri
Fax: 020 7713 4279

Email: reader@observer.co.uk
Web: www.observer.co.uk/readerseditor