Here’s Nick Denton’s response on his own blog to today’s N.Y. Times profile of him ( “Building a Web Media Empire on a Daily Dose of Fresh Links”).
It’s fine, could have been a lot more overblown. But the piece is still embarrassing, and I’ll pay some kind of price. Call it buzz karma. First they lift you up; then they knock you down.
It’s interesting to be able to turn somewhere and instantly get a subject’s response to a news item that profiles him/her. Especially since subjects always seem to have some complaint with how they are profiled (remember Dave Eggers vs. Times reporter David Kirkpatrick?).
Would anyway newspaper ever have the guts to start a blog where story subjects can post responses to articles that discuss them? I’m sure journalists would hate no longer getting the final say but it sure would be interesting.
Would anyway newspaper ever have the guts to start a blog where story subjects can post responses to articles that discuss them?
But then they'd have to actually check facts! Something like this proposal would certainly reduce the likelihood of another Jayson Blair scandal.
"But then they'd have to actually check facts!"
Which would kill journalism as we know it. Seriously.
Would it kill journalism or take it to a new level? Maybe we should all just hire the Swiss to report the news.
Kill journalism? Check facts? Ahhh, the power of the select few scallawags to pockmack an entire industry. I hesitate to imagine what sort of "egos on parade" would coast down on a blog of this nature . . . we all have perceptions of ourselves that might not hold under stronger lights.
Schaut Euch mal diese interessante Seite The ACLU said Thursday that the brief argues that peer-to-peer networks are speech-promoting technologies that have many noninfringing uses. 0 - 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5 - 6 - 7