LAT: The Price of Accuracy
To: Mickey Kaus
Re: The Case Against Copy Editors
The LA Times charges $3.95 to read old corrections.
Note: calling Bill O'Reilly 'ultraconservative' was an error of etiquette rather than description, but an inexhaustive survey reveals the paper charges for archived 'For The Record' articles, where corrections appear.
Note #2: If a reporter grants a source adjectival immunity, doesn't he have an obligation - however slight - to inform his readers? If Hilburn had written, 'Bill O'Reilly, who spoke on condition that an adjective not be placed in front of his name...' he would have fulfilled his pledge, skewered O'Reilly, and alerted the copy editor.
Note #3: I didn't spend the $3.95 to see if the correction comes free with the original article. If you want to spring for it, it's here.
Re: The Case Against Copy Editors
The LA Times charges $3.95 to read old corrections.
Note: calling Bill O'Reilly 'ultraconservative' was an error of etiquette rather than description, but an inexhaustive survey reveals the paper charges for archived 'For The Record' articles, where corrections appear.
Note #2: If a reporter grants a source adjectival immunity, doesn't he have an obligation - however slight - to inform his readers? If Hilburn had written, 'Bill O'Reilly, who spoke on condition that an adjective not be placed in front of his name...' he would have fulfilled his pledge, skewered O'Reilly, and alerted the copy editor.
Note #3: I didn't spend the $3.95 to see if the correction comes free with the original article. If you want to spring for it, it's here.
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home