<font face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif" size="2">Originally posted by essxjay:
A P.S. before moving ...
As a former 16-year journalist myself, I can vouch for the validity of Karen's approach on this. Sure, reporters start out with some idea of the story they're after. But a good reporter -- and I think Karen has demonstrated this in her reply to Efrem -- will certainly revise the thesis of the story if evidence warrants it.
Let's give her some credit (unless she proves uncreditworthy 
) if not some good, solid input.
Hey folks, we're always kvetching that "the media" (how I *hate* that expression) is always getting it wrong. Let's prove the obverse ... ess
</font>
I'm having a hard time understanding her approach. If she is looking for a story on miles redemption, fine, but to look just for one side right off the bat, I'm not so sure. If Karen talked to 20 of us, and 15 reported many problems with mileage programs, then fine report that, but what if she gets 15 stories that everything is fine in the paradise, will she still do the story?