Oatka
August 5, 2001, 02:25 PM
Orlando Sentinel (http://www.orlandosentinel.com/news/opinion/orl-oped-pubcol0805080501.story)
The man need a cluebat application.
His editor is at: [email protected]
"I won't challenge those men's appraisals of the orientation of the New York Times' editorial pages -- or those of the Washington Post or the Los Angeles Times, a sister paper of the Sentinel. What some perceive as moderate others may see as liberal -- or conservative. :rolleyes:
by Manning Pynn
Consider the source.
Good reporters remind themselves to do that, especially before publishing damaging information. Does the source of the bad news have something to gain from its publication?
A "yes" response to that question should prompt further reporting. But it shouldn't necessarily prevent the information from getting into print.
The source may have an ax to grind, but that doesn't mean that the information isn't accurate.
That's not the way some Sentinel readers see it, though.
With growing frequency, readers have been writing in to complain about the use of articles written by reporters for the New York Times. It began a couple of months ago with an e-mail message from someone who had found seven Times articles in a Sunday Sentinel.
The reader didn't take issue with the content of those articles -- the message gave no hint that he had read them -- just their source. And to him, New York Times meant "liberal."
Others obviously agree.
E-mailer Len Verdery wrote a couple of weeks ago, "Before reading your column today, I read the Sentinel's front page. The lead story was taken from the New York Times, one of the country's most liberal papers. "
Curtis Holland of Maitland, with whom I enjoy a running computer correspondence, questioned, "A New York Times lead (Tass, Pravda)? "
And W.A. Hunter of Melbourne called my attention to "a plethora of articles from the Los Angeles Times, the New York Times and the Washington Post -- all left/liberal newspapers."
I won't challenge those men's appraisals of the orientation of the New York Times' editorial pages -- or those of the Washington Post or the Los Angeles Times, a sister paper of the Sentinel. What some perceive as moderate others may see as liberal -- or conservative.
A more important distinction, which I think my e-pen pals are missing, is that newspapers strictly separate their editorial boards, which deal in opinion, from their newsgathering operations, which avoid doing so.
The Sentinel uses reports from other newspapers not because of their editorial stance but rather because of their newsgathering resources.
The Sentinel, like most regional newspapers, doesn't have correspondents in far-flung cities around the globe, as those newspapers do. Nor does it have as many reporters in various places in this country.
It only makes sense, in trying to bring our readers first-hand accounts of happenings worldwide, to enlist the help of the newspapers that have reporters on the scene. If you travel to other cities, you may find their newspapers using Orlando Sentinel articles, particularly about Central Florida developments.
But what about articles from the New York Times and other newspapers that report information not favorable to President George W. Bush or Republicans? Isn't that evidence of those publications' liberal bent?
Nope. Newspapers' role, firmly established in the First Amendment to the Constitution, is to monitor government so people who don't have time to do so can determine if they are getting fair value for their taxes.
By that standard, the party in power -- and the Republicans have the ball these days -- will receive the greater scrutiny.
That was just as true when a Democrat was president. You may remember back then a few articles -- some written by New York Times reporters -- about a White House sex scandal.
Readers should consider the source of information they receive, just as reporters do. But neither should judge that information solely by its source.
There's more to it than that.
Reach Manning Pynn at 407-650-6410 or at [email protected].
© 2001 OrlandoSentinel.com
The man need a cluebat application.
His editor is at: [email protected]
"I won't challenge those men's appraisals of the orientation of the New York Times' editorial pages -- or those of the Washington Post or the Los Angeles Times, a sister paper of the Sentinel. What some perceive as moderate others may see as liberal -- or conservative. :rolleyes:
by Manning Pynn
Consider the source.
Good reporters remind themselves to do that, especially before publishing damaging information. Does the source of the bad news have something to gain from its publication?
A "yes" response to that question should prompt further reporting. But it shouldn't necessarily prevent the information from getting into print.
The source may have an ax to grind, but that doesn't mean that the information isn't accurate.
That's not the way some Sentinel readers see it, though.
With growing frequency, readers have been writing in to complain about the use of articles written by reporters for the New York Times. It began a couple of months ago with an e-mail message from someone who had found seven Times articles in a Sunday Sentinel.
The reader didn't take issue with the content of those articles -- the message gave no hint that he had read them -- just their source. And to him, New York Times meant "liberal."
Others obviously agree.
E-mailer Len Verdery wrote a couple of weeks ago, "Before reading your column today, I read the Sentinel's front page. The lead story was taken from the New York Times, one of the country's most liberal papers. "
Curtis Holland of Maitland, with whom I enjoy a running computer correspondence, questioned, "A New York Times lead (Tass, Pravda)? "
And W.A. Hunter of Melbourne called my attention to "a plethora of articles from the Los Angeles Times, the New York Times and the Washington Post -- all left/liberal newspapers."
I won't challenge those men's appraisals of the orientation of the New York Times' editorial pages -- or those of the Washington Post or the Los Angeles Times, a sister paper of the Sentinel. What some perceive as moderate others may see as liberal -- or conservative.
A more important distinction, which I think my e-pen pals are missing, is that newspapers strictly separate their editorial boards, which deal in opinion, from their newsgathering operations, which avoid doing so.
The Sentinel uses reports from other newspapers not because of their editorial stance but rather because of their newsgathering resources.
The Sentinel, like most regional newspapers, doesn't have correspondents in far-flung cities around the globe, as those newspapers do. Nor does it have as many reporters in various places in this country.
It only makes sense, in trying to bring our readers first-hand accounts of happenings worldwide, to enlist the help of the newspapers that have reporters on the scene. If you travel to other cities, you may find their newspapers using Orlando Sentinel articles, particularly about Central Florida developments.
But what about articles from the New York Times and other newspapers that report information not favorable to President George W. Bush or Republicans? Isn't that evidence of those publications' liberal bent?
Nope. Newspapers' role, firmly established in the First Amendment to the Constitution, is to monitor government so people who don't have time to do so can determine if they are getting fair value for their taxes.
By that standard, the party in power -- and the Republicans have the ball these days -- will receive the greater scrutiny.
That was just as true when a Democrat was president. You may remember back then a few articles -- some written by New York Times reporters -- about a White House sex scandal.
Readers should consider the source of information they receive, just as reporters do. But neither should judge that information solely by its source.
There's more to it than that.
Reach Manning Pynn at 407-650-6410 or at [email protected].
© 2001 OrlandoSentinel.com