It was a Twitter firestorm all day--that NYT obit for a female rocket scientist that led with her cooking and motherly abilities. Even Public Ed. Margaret Sullivan complained about it on Twitter. Now it's been changed! Where's the beef? Gone. Now that little rocket scientist detail is at top. See it all here. Current Times obit online here, but the original did run in print. But why was that stroganoff so "mean"? And they didn't even publish a recipe.
UPDATE Interesting mini-backlash, as some express unhappiness--again via Twitter--that the Times would give in so easy to readers' complaints when story was not in error. Also, takes creativity away from writers--will fear that they can't try unusual approaches. And more. Typical tweet: "I am conflicted here; I think the new lead is better, but admit the idea of writing by popular consent spooks me." Your thoughts?
Greg Mitchell's book "So Wrong For So Long,"
on media misconduct and the Iraq war, was published this month in an updated
edition and for the first time as an e-book.
1 comment:
"will fear that they can't try unusual approaches."
That's an original complaint :)
That obit mess was not remotely an "unusual" approach; it was the classic stereotyped approach to any significant woman's obituary by a lazy journalist.
Post a Comment