• Welcome to Baptist Board, a friendly forum to discuss the Baptist Faith in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to all the features that our community has to offer.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon and God Bless!

NY Times--egg on face once again

rbell

Active Member
Seems the NY Times has fouled up again, with shoddy journalism practice.

NY TIMES STORY

Seems that a katrina "victim" they gushed over (original story HERE), was actually a welfare fraud extroidanaire.

Good grief, in their rush to push an agenda, you'd think that every now and then they'd check sources or something.
 

Bro. Curtis

<img src =/curtis.gif>
Site Supporter
People are so eager to undermine our president, they'll even cast doe-eyed admiration at charlie Sheen.
 

Daisy

New Member
Yet it is the Times who apparently outted itself.

The article was based on interviews with Ms. Fenton, caseworkers with the Salvation Army, employees of the Ramada Plaza Hotel in Queens, where Ms. Fenton lives, and Amanda McGee, who described herself as the fiancée of Ms. Fenton's oldest son. Ms. Fenton said that she lived at the hotel with her five children, and that her husband had come with her from Biloxi but was living elsewhere in New York.

&lt;snip&gt;

A reporter originally obtained Ms. Fenton's name from the Rev. Donald Hudson, a Queens pastor active in efforts to secure aid for Katrina evacuees in New York. Mr. Hudson had described her as an evacuee who might be willing to be profiled, after the reporter asked him for possible interview subjects. A reporter visited Ms. Fenton on two occasions, in late February and early March, and spent several hours with her, even watching her battle with FEMA officials on the phone.

&lt;snip&gt;

Mr. Hudson, whose church assisted Ms. Fenton after she arrived at the Ramada, said he was not aware of her previous record when he referred a reporter to her. "We deal with everybody as survivors," he said. "Our network doesn't do criminal investigations. If they're here, if they're registered with FEMA, if they've gone through case management, that's how we clear it."
Meh. It's not as though they made the whole thing up or did no checking; they got taken in by a con-woman in doing a human interest story. Now they've written a 2-page retraction.

Why do you think that this is a big deal?
 

Enoch

New Member
Originally posted by Daisy:
Why do you think that this is a big deal?
It’s humorous…
laugh.gif


And what about the unfortunate duped people who put a lot of stock in the NYT as their trusty news source.
 

Daisy

New Member
Exactly how were the "unfortunate duped people" harmed by the one part of a story of Katrina survivors in NY having trouble with FEMA being wrong and subsequently retracted?

Anyone who takes a daily newspaper for inerrant truth really ought to be shaken awake.
 

Plain Old Bill

New Member
The NYT times has a long time history of liberal bias.They seem less likely to be thorough in checking out thier stories when the "story" they intend to print may be damaging to anybody who holds views they do not share.
 

Daisy

New Member
Originally posted by Plain Old Bill:
The NYT times has a long time history of liberal bias.They seem less likely to be thorough in checking out thier stories when the "story" they intend to print may be damaging to anybody who holds views they do not share.
That's quite an accusation. Do you have anything to back that up with?
 

emeraldctyangel

New Member
Originally posted by Daisy:
Why do you think that this is a big deal?
Because it frustrates ordinary people who want to read the truth.

Consistent glorification of criminals and 15 minutes of famers pretty much puts a media source in the same light at those papers who cover story things like 'World's Largest Baby found in Pumpkin patch; survives 2 years on pumpkin seeds'.

This is a serious time for serious people; high school journalism classes seem to know that better than the NYT.

Bro Curtis, you may receive a cleaning bill for my monitor if you keep that up! LOL!
 

poncho

Well-Known Member
Originally posted by Bro. Curtis:
People are so eager to undermine our president, they'll even cast doe-eyed admiration at charlie Sheen.
Actually only 84% of the people polled agreed with him. ;)

Problems with the Carlyle group press corps (NYT) again eh? Yeah these folks with financial ties to the Bushies really will go to any lengths to ruin one of their own.
laugh.gif
 

Daisy

New Member
Originally posted by emeraldctyangel:
Because it frustrates ordinary people who want to read the truth.
A newspaper is not an oracle. They made a mistake, they retracted it.

Consistent glorification of criminals and 15 minutes of famers pretty much puts a media source in the same light at those papers who cover story things like 'World's Largest Baby found in Pumpkin patch; survives 2 years on pumpkin seeds'.
I don't disagree, but that does not describe the NYT.

This is a serious time for serious people; high school journalism classes seem to know that better than the NYT.
You're saying that high school journalism classes know that this is a serious time for serious people better than the NYT does? I'm not sure how you could even go about evaluating that.
I get the feeling that you've never actually opened a copy of the NYT and read it.
 

Daisy

New Member
Originally posted by Bro. Curtis:
People are so eager to undermine our president, they'll even cast doe-eyed admiration at charlie Sheen.
Um, the Times didn't cover that story - a quick search (linkie) shows that "Charlie Sheen" only shows up in the Arts Section, under TV listings. I'm unsure how much overlap there is of people who admire Charlie Sheen as a political commentator and of people who read the A-section of the Times.
 
Top