[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: Siegel and Lewis
At 7:22 PM 01/03/95, Raph Levien wrote:
> His piece that ran Saturday was badly mangled by the editorial
>process, especially since it ran on page one. Those articles get to be
>mangled by a whole new set of people who otherwise wouldn't get to
>touch it. I think Lewis has basically good intentions, and does do his
>homework before writing a story.
Yeah, I encourage everyone to actually _finish_ reading that article before
putting Lewis on your permanent hate list. I almost put it down in
disgust, from the stuff on page 1, but if you turn to where the article is
continued, it becomes quite a bit more balanced and less fear-mongering.
In a rather disjointed sort of way, that makes it easy to beleive the
article was mangled somewhat in editing. Perhaps they rearanged it to put
the "sensational" fear-mongering stuff first. Which is unfortunate, and
perhaps intentional, because most people probably won't make it to the end
of the article, and if they do, will have been pre-biased by the initial
paragraphs, especially if this is the first they've heard of the subject.
But I don't have too much trouble believing that all blame belongs on the
editors, and not Lewis. :)