Correcting more than the latest copy

Text A: an original contemporary practice extract.

I printed the museum club’s meeting date as Tuesday instead of Wednesday. When I noticed, I changed the online notice and felt relieved to see the right date there. Then a member arrived on Tuesday with the printed newsletter folded in her bag. My correct screen had not reached the copy she was using.

I sent a clearly marked correction, explained which earlier notice it replaced and apologised for the wasted journey. We also checked the copies displayed at the library. Quietly repairing the version in front of me had been necessary but incomplete. People needed to know that an earlier instruction had changed, especially when they had already trusted it enough to plan an evening.

Text B: an original contemporary practice extract.

During a language class, I wrote an incorrect example on the board. I spotted it during the break and rewrote the sentence before the learners returned. One student later used the original version from her notebook. She had copied it carefully, and the correction on the board gave her no reason to think the earlier notes needed attention.

I told the class which example I had changed and asked them to mark the correction beside their own copies. I did not turn the explanation into a long account of my embarrassment. The useful part was identifying the error and the replacement clearly. Getting the current board right did not finish the task while earlier versions remained in the places where people would consult them.

Both texts describe the ways the public mistakes are corrected.

What similarities do the ways the public mistakes are corrected share in these extracts? Use evidence from both texts to support your answer.