2 ms·
They also consider themselves exempt from the common practice that text in quotes contains sentences the people quoted have actually said or written. I.e., the
by bowlofpetunias 13y ago
They also consider themselves exempt from the common practice that text in quotes contains sentences the people quoted have actually said or written.
I.e., the author may as well have pulled it out of her ass, and you would be none the wiser. That's old school quality journalism for you.
- EdwigePelagia 13y agoYeah this is pretty absurd. I've been "quoted" a few times in newspapers and they got my statements completely wrong. Just flat out changed the wording (and therefore meaning) of what I said. The Globe and Mail is as authoritative and reputable as they get, but this isn't saying much. The media is just a shit show in general. Having said that, even more pathetic is people who get their information from internet forums asking journalists to cite sources. The authority hierarchy goes like this: Academic writing > Books by credentialed people > YouTube videos by credentialed people > Websites by credentialed people > Newspapers > Yahoo! Answers > Hacker News comments > Wikipedia.
- 001sky 13y agoCrowd-sourcing citations, conventional wisdom, and syllabi seems rather distinct from "the authority hierarchy", and the ROI is far more massive the further up that food chain you are, right? probably worth keeping in mind...