I judge the NY Times as unreliable for not seeing the problem in the first place. They have layers of editors and checkers for this type of stuff. I assume that this went through these layers without comment. As for the blog, I'm only judging them for and on this single article/issue and only based on my being able to verify their information. If a blog says something and I can't verify it, then it's only commentary/speculation. I need to know for sure and see for myself. On a related note, just because I like a post from a blog does not mean I like the blog. Michelle Malkin has some great stuff, but can take a single thing and beat it over and over (such as today when she stated "young Muslim males" over and over as the suspects in the airplane terrorism case). Little Green Footballs tends to be very good, but again, I need to be sure of their information as with all information sources.
Personally, I want everyone to be like me. Take all news with a grain of salt and examine it. Take all blog posts with a grain of salt and judge them. Be just a little paranoid that there are people out there looking to trick and manipulate you. Don't let them. >I give the blog credit for the update. I don't remember the caption, to be > honest. But why does the update make the blog reliable, and not the NYT? > Not > that I am especially defending the NYT; I think they are not very > objective > lately, but not, I think, for the same reasons as you. > > On 8/10/06, Michael Dinowitz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >> >> Lets assume that the blog is not reliable. All we have to do is check >> their >> data to judge for ourselves. Is the guy alive in the first shots? Yes. If >> he >> shown laying down with his hat between his arm and body? Yes. Does the >> caption totally imply that he's a dead body? I'd say so. >> But the point is moot as the NYTimes just had to say "whoops, we really >> meant he was hurt while helping" which absolves the editor who approved >> it >> of any responsibility. >> >> Oh, on questioning the reliability of the blog, they did update it with >> all >> of the responses and additional information. That says responsible to me. >> As >> opposed to many media outlets who refuse or don't bother to do >> retractions. >> >> > ok, I realize that you guys have already been at this for a couple of >> > days, >> > but how reliable is the blog, first of all? >> > >> >> >> > > ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~| Introducing the Fusion Authority Quarterly Update. 80 pages of hard-hitting, up-to-date ColdFusion information by your peers, delivered to your door four times a year. http://www.fusionauthority.com/quarterly Archive: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/CF-Community/message.cfm/messageid:213051 Subscription: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/CF-Community/subscribe.cfm Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/unsubscribe.cfm?user=89.70.5
