Re: My private note to LLB (for what it's worth...)

Posted by Julie from SoCal on April 18, 2002 at 16:23:42:

In Reply to: My private note to LLB (for what it's worth...) posted by Adele Ashworth on April 18, 2002 at 11:17:53:

: My email to Laurie:

: "Just wanted to send a quick note in support of what you did. I have a degree in journalism, so I do see this debate from both angles. One, I realize RLH probably *did* say the things she said she did and in the way she insists her words were said. And two, the Statesman reporter probably *did* report what he thought he heard from her mouth. You've got two individuals here who are looking at the situation from two very different angles. Aside from finding a *lead* or attention grabber for the article, I don't think any reporter who makes maybe 30K a year would stoop to gossip and sensationalism just for a scoop on a local romance author. I've known a lot of reporters for mainstream papers and news organizations in my day, and nearly all of them were honest in their intent. RLH, on the other hand, is likely taken aback for having some of her comments taken *out of context* as she claims. I'm sure she feels they were, and probably now regrets giving the interview at all."

: I should also add here that contacting the Statesman for their take on it isn't in any way wrong or sensational. It's sort of like LLB doing her own *journalism* for this site. As long as she prints comments exactly as they come in, there's nothing underhanded about it. If she sparks controversy, well... some people will despise her approach, some people will appreciate it. I try to take everything I read with a grain of salt. That's only my opinion, of course.

: Adele, now moving back into lurkdom...

------------------------------------------------
As someone who currently works at a newspaper way bigger than the Statesman (oops, that sounded bitchy), I agree with Adele's posting. My newspaper used to send out questionnaires to people who were interviewed and asked them if they thought they were treated fairly and if they were quoted correctly. The reporters would see these reports. Don't know if the Statesman does this. I doubt very much if there will be any sort of retraction or correction. An interview subject just has to remember that EVERYTHING said is on the record and you have to be very clear in your statements so there's no misunderstanding. Have an idea of a hook before you're interviewed so the writer doesn't have to find one that might not be what you want to publicize.

Communication is a funny thing and the message gets altered, however subtly, every time it goes through another person.

Julie

Follow Ups:

Name:
E-Mail:

Subject:

Comments:
: : My email to Laurie: : : "Just wanted to send a quick note in support of what you did. I have a degree in journalism, so I do see this debate from both angles. One, I realize RLH probably *did* say the things she said she did and in the way she insists her words were said. And two, the Statesman reporter probably *did* report what he thought he heard from her mouth. You've got two individuals here who are looking at the situation from two very different angles. Aside from finding a *lead* or attention grabber for the article, I don't think any reporter who makes maybe 30K a year would stoop to gossip and sensationalism just for a scoop on a local romance author. I've known a lot of reporters for mainstream papers and news organizations in my day, and nearly all of them were honest in their intent. RLH, on the other hand, is likely taken aback for having some of her comments taken *out of context* as she claims. I'm sure she feels they were, and probably now regrets giving the interview at all." : : I should also add here that contacting the Statesman for their take on it isn't in any way wrong or sensational. It's sort of like LLB doing her own *journalism* for this site. As long as she prints comments exactly as they come in, there's nothing underhanded about it. If she sparks controversy, well... some people will despise her approach, some people will appreciate it. I try to take everything I read with a grain of salt. That's only my opinion, of course. : : Adele, now moving back into lurkdom... : : ------------------------------------------------ : As someone who currently works at a newspaper way bigger than the Statesman (oops, that sounded bitchy), I agree with Adele's posting. My newspaper used to send out questionnaires to people who were interviewed and asked them if they thought they were treated fairly and if they were quoted correctly. The reporters would see these reports. Don't know if the Statesman does this. I doubt very much if there will be any sort of retraction or correction. An interview subject just has to remember that EVERYTHING said is on the record and you have to be very clear in your statements so there's no misunderstanding. Have an idea of a hook before you're interviewed so the writer doesn't have to find one that might not be what you want to publicize. : Communication is a funny thing and the message gets altered, however subtly, every time it goes through another person. : Julie :