3 ms·

This was not a simple update. This was a rewrite that changed the format and the content - from a factual report to an opinion piece chastising the evil white m

This was not a simple update. This was a rewrite that changed the format and the content - from a factual report to an opinion piece chastising the evil white men of SV, all while managing to put a positive spin on a humiliating trial. This may not be new in the dishonorable world of journalism, but it's the first time many of us outsiders get to look behind the curtain. We kind of suspected how the sausage is made, but actually seeing it is still shocking.

magicalist 11y ago
This complaint and others in this thread all seem to be that you don't like the new content of the article and have nothing to do with the article being updated.
- stefantalpalaru 11y ago
  Is that really what you understood from what I wrote?
declan 11y ago
My intent was to describe newsroom practices, not to express an opinion about the NYT's rewrites. It is commonplace for important stories to be extensively rewritten and amended. I don't know enough about the Reddit saga to discuss it intelligently. I will stipulate that the NYT editorial board has lectured Silicon Valley on diversity, though it is not diverse itself, and its female executive editor made less than her male predecessor: http://www.aei.org/publication/silicon-valley-gets-stern-lecture-diversity-mostly-white-mostly-male-ny-times-editorial-board/ http://www.aei.org/publication/silicon-valley-gets-stern-lec... http://www.businessinsider.com/nyt-explains-female-editor-smaller-salary-than-male-2014-5 http://www.businessinsider.com/nyt-explains-female-editor-sm... As for the rewrites, changing the lede graf to "entrenched sexist culture of Silicon Valley" is significant. It replaces neutral reportage -- "a week of ceaseless criticism" -- with the newspaper asserting as fact that Silicon Valley represents a more "entrenched sexist culture" than, say, the NYT newsroom itself. It's intended to frame the story in a typical high-level next-day NYT fashion by injecting the author's, or editor's, perspective. It's excellent journalism when it's accurate, but creates the type of controversy you see here when it's not.

magicalist 11y ago

This complaint and others in this thread all seem to be that you don't like the new content of the article and have nothing to do with the article being updated.

stefantalpalaru 11y ago
Is that really what you understood from what I wrote?

declan 11y ago

My intent was to describe newsroom practices, not to express an opinion about the NYT's rewrites. It is commonplace for important stories to be extensively rewritten and amended. I don't know enough about the Reddit saga to discuss it intelligently. I will stipulate that the NYT editorial board has lectured Silicon Valley on diversity, though it is not diverse itself, and its female executive editor made less than her male predecessor: http://www.aei.org/publication/silicon-valley-gets-stern-lecture-diversity-mostly-white-mostly-male-ny-times-editorial-board/ http://www.aei.org/publication/silicon-valley-gets-stern-lec... http://www.businessinsider.com/nyt-explains-female-editor-smaller-salary-than-male-2014-5 http://www.businessinsider.com/nyt-explains-female-editor-sm... As for the rewrites, changing the lede graf to "entrenched sexist culture of Silicon Valley" is significant. It replaces neutral reportage -- "a week of ceaseless criticism" -- with the newspaper asserting as fact that Silicon Valley represents a more "entrenched sexist culture" than, say, the NYT newsroom itself. It's intended to frame the story in a typical high-level next-day NYT fashion by injecting the author's, or editor's, perspective. It's excellent journalism when it's accurate, but creates the type of controversy you see here when it's not.