Update on the New York Times' Hit on Bloggers

Hee, hee. The same day they presume to criticize us, they also announce their new plans to build credibility.

Wait-- why the need to "build" credibility? I thought those vaunted multiple layers of fact-checking editors already provided all the credibility they could need or want.

Thanks to Andy the Squirrel.

Update: Andy knows I've got no time to read this nonsense, so he read it for me, and snarked it up:

The committee, made up of 11 editors, 6 reporters, a copy editor and a photographer, submitted its report to Mr. Keller on April 26.

Great. Editors, reporters, copy editor. Photographer. A real cross-section of the industry, nay, America. More like, "The guys that happened to be around the 5th floor bathroom when I came up with this idea".

The committee said the system would not be used to compile error rates of individual reporters, noting that using raw numeric counts as part of a reporter's evaluation "would breed resentment."

Now THAT is great. GREAT. You do NOT want to breed accountability or responsibility. You do NOT want to keep track of someone pumping out unadulterated BS on a regular basis to millions of readers. What you DO want is unresentful employees.

Can you imagine if any other business did that? "Hey, listen, Jeff Williams is complaining. Yes, that Jeff, the one that crashed the 707 in Duluth back in 96 and landed without his gear down just last week. Yeah, he's pissed that we're tracking those sorts of incidents, and you know what? He's got a point. Imagine if we tracked ALL the screwups our pilots made. Man, we would have ONE RESENTFUL GROUP OF PEOPLE, wouldn't we? So let's not let fidiciary duty get in the way of people's self esteem, hmmm what do you say?"

The media seems very interested in documenting the sins of everyone except their own, don't they?

posted by Ace at 01:38 PM

| Access Comments