Seeking permission from Power;
The New York Times has introduced a new policy opposing "quote approval," the widespread practice of letting sources edit their own quotes prior to publication. [,,,]The move is a landmark decision in a debate that's been playing out throughout the industry, following a report by the Times that revealed how the White House, the Obama and Romney campaigns, and other organizations required quote-approval schemes as a pre-condition for interviews.
And who can blame them? As a great blogging sage once said - "If you believe everything you read in the paper, try getting interviewed sometime."
Reporters pretty much get it wrong enough to make one wonder whether they are all retarded or doing it deliberately. Ralph Klein was quoted as saying something outrageous by a reporter. Klein's defense - "let me check the tape." Klein apparently recorded every interview. Smart move. Just don't try to record everything like Nixon.
Aside from either deliberate or negligent misquotes, a reporter will quote the most controversial 10 seconds of what you said in an hour long interview, even if they have to invent the controversy. Quote editing is appropriate, especially when things you say can be taken out of context, misconstrued, or dare I even say momentary lapses of reason or gaffes.
I have to agree. Having been interviewed numerous times throughout my career, no journalist can be trusted to get a quote correct nor can they ever be trusted to use it in context. It's your story but it's their message.
Most reporters today are leftist trust fund baby cretins.
Then there are the really bad ones ...
I still recall my appearance on a local CBC television interview in which I was asked three questions that were never asked to me while the interview was being filmed, and those questions were then paired with remarks I did make in response to different questions.
Well at this rate, I'd take them 2 hours to pull 5 coherent sentences from S. Dion in english... The CTV only only took a few takes to video a decent introduction, back in the day.
This reads as though they're still smarting over B. Hussien's, "57 states and I think 2 more to go..." Not so much pain from S. Palin's, you can practically see Russia from my doorstep...
and.. when will the NY Times begin seeking final approvals for interviews to ensure the correct nuance?
Sounds like they're gearing up for a Romney presidency.
The bad news is that 40 percent still believe what they read in the newspapers.
I commented on this on another forum.
All Romney need do is announce that he no longer will grant interviews to the NYT's.
Just state that he will no longer give interviews to media that have mislead the public by twisting facts or statements, and that he and he alone will make that determination.
Watch the NYT's head spin.
marc in Calgary: I'm sure you now better, but Sarah Palin never said "I can see Russia from my doorstep." She said, "You can see Russia from Alaska", which is literal fact. Stand on Little Diomede Island, Alaskan territory in Bering Strait, and look at Big Diomede Island, and you are looking at Russian territory. The false statement was made by Leftard comedienne, Tina Fey, playing the role of Sarah Palin on a TV show.
james at September 21, 2012 11:32 AM
I wish that where true. Unfortunately Romney has not figured out yet hes running against the Chicago mob instead of Snow White.. With a hostile press that views Obama as a Messiah to every Red baby ever born. Including the well infiltrated Marxist press.
You cant be a pussycat in a room full of hyenas.
Than expect to walk out a lion.
gordinkneehill... thanks, it's what the media would have us believe, I didn't look for the exact quote, and the reason I didn't include quotation marks surrounding Sarah's supposed quote.
cheers.