![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
Heeee...the press are so full of themselves. Though the subject is sobering, the fact that journalists get caught in a holier-than-thou makes me chuckle :)
Maureen Dowd's column New York Times -- you may have to register, but it's free. Here's the passage, though:
Chief Moose ludicrously objected that the Virginia police revealed Monday night that the sniper's white van had a faulty left taillight. He still seems to be coming to grips with the idea that we're in the era of instant communication, Amber Alerts and police scanners.
So Ms. Dowd is annoyed the Chief of Police is worried about leaks? What does she think? The cops should be having press conferences? As Chief Moose complained after the Tarot Card leak, if the press feels they know what evidence is safe to release (that is: all of it) perhaps the press should be running the investigation.
It's not so ludicrous now that it's known that a tipster was making everything up. Dowd's column appeared a week after someone called in a false sniper on the roof of a shopping center so he could get the day off work. The cops know that cases like these attract the nutcases.
Now, I don't always mind a news cycle full of misinformation. It keeps the press off the streets and out of trouble by reporting and trying to dig up leads on phantom news. It humbles the press (in the eyes of others, not the press) and makes their motivations a bit more transparent. Objective news or profit, fame, and saving the world?
Whatever happened to publishing tips only after double sourcing? What happened to the impartiality of the major news providers? I'll tell you what happened: Instant communication, Amber Alerts, and police scanners.
Maureen Dowd's column New York Times -- you may have to register, but it's free. Here's the passage, though:
Chief Moose ludicrously objected that the Virginia police revealed Monday night that the sniper's white van had a faulty left taillight. He still seems to be coming to grips with the idea that we're in the era of instant communication, Amber Alerts and police scanners.
So Ms. Dowd is annoyed the Chief of Police is worried about leaks? What does she think? The cops should be having press conferences? As Chief Moose complained after the Tarot Card leak, if the press feels they know what evidence is safe to release (that is: all of it) perhaps the press should be running the investigation.
It's not so ludicrous now that it's known that a tipster was making everything up. Dowd's column appeared a week after someone called in a false sniper on the roof of a shopping center so he could get the day off work. The cops know that cases like these attract the nutcases.
Now, I don't always mind a news cycle full of misinformation. It keeps the press off the streets and out of trouble by reporting and trying to dig up leads on phantom news. It humbles the press (in the eyes of others, not the press) and makes their motivations a bit more transparent. Objective news or profit, fame, and saving the world?
Whatever happened to publishing tips only after double sourcing? What happened to the impartiality of the major news providers? I'll tell you what happened: Instant communication, Amber Alerts, and police scanners.
