quote:
I have worked as an editor as well as a writer. I can’t speak for anyone else, but if one of my people quoted an anonymous source, I had to know who it was before we used it. And it’s something that I rarely if ever permitted, only when absolutely necessary. But you’d be stunned at the kind of people who like to talk to us if not as a primary source but on background. Keeping one’s mouth shut isn’t human nature.

Did you edit tweets?

Edit to add:

quote:
Fully agree with you. And I think it’s gotten worse with journalists going on Twitter and much like Kiffin did acting like 16-year-old girls. I despise Twitter, which I once heard described as 3 million infants shaking their rattles.

This post was edited on 11/25 at 10:58 am

This answers my question (I didn't see it before posting).

I stand by my original comment.
Jon should out his source if the information is fake news. Or quit.
Twitter is the vessel that should correct bad journalism.

This post was edited on 11/25/22 at 11:21 am

1 ...

Report Post

Posted by InkStainedWretch

Member since Dec 2018

1852 posts

Posted on 11/25/22 at 11:38 am to meansonny

OK let me come at it this way … and I’ll say up front I don’t know Sokoloff from Adam’s house cat, have no clue about his background and skills and track record.

He burns this source, nobody will ever talk to him again.

But what if he comes across some information that YOU would like to know, but he can’t verify or confirm it because he’s now reviled as the guy who burns his sources?

And don’t play the “we can just wait until the official announcement” card because that denies human nature too, and if people were willing to just wait for the official announcement on things places like this wouldn’t exist LOL.

1 ...

Report Post

SEC Rant - Replies to Post

Return To Board

Page 1

Return To Board