Unpopular opinions that you hold

[miajag]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
The degree to which you exaggerated #2 makes it wrong regardless of whether you see it as an opinion or not.

[/ QUOTE ]

Hence it was an unpopular opinion....at least with liberal morons. How you can even argue that it's incorrect after they've been busted posting fake stories by authors etc is laughable. Their fact checking is only slightly better than Dan Rather's.

[/ QUOTE ]

Newspapers don't have fact checkers. Writers verify accuracy and show their notes to editors.

Magazines have fact checkers.

[/ QUOTE ]

One of the primary jobs of copy editors at most newspapers is to check facts.

[djoyce003]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
#2 is an opinion, sorry you disagree (incorrectly I might add), but it's an opinion nonetheless...by definition it can't be "wrong." Try harder [censored].

[/ QUOTE ]

It's not an opinion. The Times routinely gets stories right. The often spoken criticisms, true or not, are not about accuracy. They are about bias. To conflate any competent newspaper with a tabloid that deliberately makes up stories is retarded.

[/ QUOTE ]


ahem...front page of the NYT...just an example. Also feel free to page up and take in the story about Jason Blair's 36 fake "news" stories.

NYT awesome fact checking on their FRONT PAGE

[The DaveR]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
#2 is an opinion, sorry you disagree (incorrectly I might add), but it's an opinion nonetheless...by definition it can't be "wrong." Try harder [censored].

[/ QUOTE ]

It's not an opinion. The Times routinely gets stories right. The often spoken criticisms, true or not, are not about accuracy. They are about bias. To conflate any competent newspaper with a tabloid that deliberately makes up stories is retarded.

[/ QUOTE ]


ahem...front page of the NYT...just an example. Also feel free to page up and take in the story about Jason Blair's 36 fake "news" stories.

NYT awesome fact checking on their FRONT PAGE

[/ QUOTE ]

So a half dozen examples still does not make your original point. Your point could be made by demonstrating intentional fabrication by the editors, but you're not doing that.

[Aloysius]

From NYTimes Website:

[ QUOTE ]
Fact Checking. Writers at The Times are their own principal fact checkers and often their only ones. (Magazine articles, especially those by nonmembers of our staff, are fact-checked, but even magazine writers are accountable in the first instance for their own accuracy.) Concrete facts – distances, addresses, phone numbers, people’s titles – must be verified by the writer with standard references like telephone books, city or legislative directories and official Web sites. More obscure checks may be referred to the research desk. If deadline pressure requires skipping a check, the editors should be alerted with a flag like "desk, please verify," but ideally the writer should double back for the check after filing; usually the desk can accommodate a last-minute repair. It is especially important that writers verify the spelling of names, by asking . A person who sees his or her own name misspelled in The Times is likely to mistrust whatever else we print. And too often, our correction column makes it clear that someone has guessed a spelling by the sound.

[/ QUOTE ]

Mia - I had an internship at NYTimes in college, and copy editors never had the time (or the onus on them) to fact check in a diligent manner (only stuff that seemed really absurd or questionable). Can't speak for other dailies, but considering deadline pressures, I can't imagine there's a ton of fact checking going on.

-Al

[djoyce003]

Yeah...i guess fake stories on their front page aren't the editors responsibility, jesus christ. I forgot the cardinal rule of arguing with idiots...they bring you down to their level and beat you with experience.

[The DaveR]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
The degree to which you exaggerated #2 makes it wrong regardless of whether you see it as an opinion or not.

[/ QUOTE ]

Hence it was an unpopular opinion....at least with liberal morons. How you can even argue that it's incorrect after they've been busted posting fake stories by authors etc is laughable. Their fact checking is only slightly better than Dan Rather's.

[/ QUOTE ]

Newspapers don't have fact checkers. Writers verify accuracy and show their notes to editors.

Magazines have fact checkers.

[/ QUOTE ]

One of the primary jobs of copy editors at most newspapers is to check facts.

[/ QUOTE ]

As far as I know, they don't call sources to verify statements. Doing that, which I think of when I think of the job of a Fact Checker, I believe, is only in magazines.

[miajag]

[ QUOTE ]
From NYTimes Website:

[ QUOTE ]
Fact Checking. Writers at The Times are their own principal fact checkers and often their only ones. (Magazine articles, especially those by nonmembers of our staff, are fact-checked, but even magazine writers are accountable in the first instance for their own accuracy.) Concrete facts – distances, addresses, phone numbers, people’s titles – must be verified by the writer with standard references like telephone books, city or legislative directories and official Web sites. More obscure checks may be referred to the research desk. If deadline pressure requires skipping a check, the editors should be alerted with a flag like "desk, please verify," but ideally the writer should double back for the check after filing; usually the desk can accommodate a last-minute repair. It is especially important that writers verify the spelling of names, by asking . A person who sees his or her own name misspelled in The Times is likely to mistrust whatever else we print. And too often, our correction column makes it clear that someone has guessed a spelling by the sound.

[/ QUOTE ]

Mia - I had an internship at NYTimes in college, and copy editors never had the time (or the onus on them) to fact check in a diligent manner (only stuff that seemed really absurd or questionable). Can't speak for other dailies, but considering deadline pressures, I can't imagine there's a ton of fact checking going on.

-Al

[/ QUOTE ]

Well, it's certainly possible that they do things differently at the Times, but at the various newspapers where I've worked (including the Washington Post), fact checking is one of the copy editors' main duties.

[The DaveR]

[ QUOTE ]
Yeah...i guess fake stories on their front page aren't the editors responsibility, jesus christ. I forgot the cardinal rule of arguing with idiots...they bring you down to their level and beat you with experience.

[/ QUOTE ]

Nice job changing the point. So the analogy you intended is that The Times has editors as irresponsible as The National Enquirer. Funny how you amended your claim.

[eviljeff]

[ QUOTE ]

I'd rather eat at the bar in a restaurant than get table service.

[/ QUOTE ]

no you wouldn't!

[Phoenix1010]

1. The meat and dairy industries are immoral, and boycotting them is the only morally consistent way (for me) to live.

2. Old timers vastly overrate some movies that just don't hold up very well, like Blade Runner and Blazing Saddles.

3. Young folks vastly overrate some music that just really isn't that great, like the Arcade Fire and Sufjan Stevens.

4. Lateralus is on par with Aenima, and is better in some ways.

5. Getting all "ROFL she has fat thighs" over legitimately attractive girls with natural flaws is a sign of a jackass. The kicker: Getting all "OMG she so hawt" over photoshopped and heavily air-brushed girls is a sign of the same brand of jackass.

6. Having a refined taste for food/alcohol/books/movies/etc. does not, in fact, make you better than anyone else. Judging people based on these tastes does, in fact, make you a jackass.

7. I really can't get into Radiohead.

8. Buying into popular ideas and touting popular material simply because they're popular makes you a fish. Unfortunately, mindlessly joining in the backlash against popular ideas and products just makes you a jackass. In short, agreeing or disagreeing with something without actually thinking about it is unacceptably stupid.

9. Family Guy is overall better than South Park (although SP's highs are higher). American Dad is a great show. I'm not a huge Futurama fan but I've only seen the few episodes they keep replaying on Adult Swim so I can't pass judgement. Sealab 2021 is the best Adult Swim show ever, followed by Venture Bros.

10. Women are people.