<font face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif" size="2">Originally posted by essxjay:
Bee Ess!!!!!
Your post was credible up to this point. But unless you work for a newspaper, you are talking out of your back side!!!
Writers do have time, and specifically make time, for fact-checking -- it's part of their job.
I've been in the business for 15 years and I will vouch for my paper's practicies stated above.
</font>
my understanding from loggia's quote was that newspapers may not have the kind of time magazines have to check quotes. In my experience - my best friend has been an editor of the local SF newspaper for many years - if the facts in question are vouched for by a member of the staff BESIDES the reporter in question, many many facts ar e not checked. If the reporter says he/she has permission to quote, then no follow up is done to see if that is really true. If it's a weird or potentially slanderous fact abvout a public figure - sure, there's fact checking. But it certainly isn;t the NORM, at least not on one of the main SF papers. I did not see an insult on loggia's post and I wonder if the response was a little overreactive...
edited for speling
[This message has been edited by squeakr (edited 08-13-2001).]