Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 2006/01/04

[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]

Subject: [Leica] still more on Leica "rumor" and NYT
From: bdcolen at comcast.net (B. D. Colen)
Date: Wed Jan 4 13:11:56 2006

Not "confirming?" the AP story? By doing what, having the "front page
editor" go to West Virginia? Or "make a phone call" to whom? You really
haven't got the vaguest idea how newspapers work, or about the roles of
reporters and editors, do you?


On 1/4/06 3:59 PM, "mcyclwritr@comcast.net" <mcyclwritr@comcast.net> wrote:

> While NYT considers itself the paper of record the nation's conscience, its
> reporters are expected to be neither omniscient nor even omnipresent.
> 
> It appears this particular goof is the fault of the front page editor for 
> not
> confirming the AP story. If it's a two-inch blurb for Section ZZ on
> taste-tempting Valentine's Day cupcakes, go ahead run it without double
> checking. If it's a front page story involving life and death, at least 
> make a
> phone call.
> 
> -Chris Lawson 
> 
>  -------------- Original message ----------------------
> From: Matt Powell <wooderson@gmail.com>
>> On 1/4/06, mcyclwritr@comcast.net <mcyclwritr@comcast.net> wrote:
>>> This exactly the sort of NYT apologist retort I anticipated. That's why 
>>> my
>> original post >included a whiff of Basic Reporting 101, which, 
>> predictably,
>> is 
>> missing from your reply.
>>> 
>>> How do you know what the "mining company told family members and others?"
>>> Was 
>> it >broadcast on TV?
>> 
>> Oh, dear, I'm an apologist!
>> 
>> But yes, every other source I've seen followed the same basic outline
>> - if you look at the CNN story, it refers to how the survivor rumors
>> got started and the miners' families getting physically angry at the
>> mining company, who had led them on (presumably by accident).
>> 
>> I was unaware that NYT reporters were required to be omniscient,
>> rather than simply using what information appeared to be credible at
>> the time.
>> --
>> Matt Powell
>> wooderson@gmail.com
>> 
>> 
>> _______________________________________________
>> Leica Users Group.
>> See http://leica-users.org/mailman/listinfo/lug for more information
> 
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Leica Users Group.
> See http://leica-users.org/mailman/listinfo/lug for more information



Replies: Reply from tedgrant at shaw.ca (Ted Grant) ([Leica] still more on Leica "rumor" and NYT)
In reply to: Message from mcyclwritr at comcast.net (mcyclwritr@comcast.net) ([Leica] still more on Leica "rumor" and NYT)