The Times Issues a Correction

Posted:
in General Discussion edited January 2014
A little <a href="http://www.nytimes.com/2002/12/15/pageoneplus/corrections.html?pagewanted=2"; target="_blank">unintentional comedy</a> from the NY Times. (link via AndrewSullivan.com)



[quote] An article on Nov. 10 about animal rights referred erroneously to an island in the Indian Ocean and to events there involving goats and endangered giant sea sparrows that could possibly lead to the killing of goats by environmental groups. Wrightson Island does not exist; both the island and the events are hypothetical figments from a book (also mentioned in the article), ''Beginning Again,'' by David Ehrenfeld. No giant sea sparrow is known to be endangered by the eating habits of goats.<hr></blockquote>



Comments

  • Reply 1 of 19
    scottscott Posts: 7,431member
    The NYT is getting sloppy. The way they try to create news out of thin air is a laugh. Like the whole Tigger Woods/CBS/Masters thing. Or the recent "Vatican Shift Mixes Signals". Just because the NYT is getting mixed signals doesn't mean it's a news story.



    Oh how I wish <a href="http://www.smartertimes.com/"; target="_blank">smartertimes</a> was still posting.
  • Reply 2 of 19
    Above: Two conservatives commenting about the Times, the most award-winning newspaper out there. Who knows, maybe they'll even praise the journalistic integrity of Fox News Channel as clearly superior to that of the Times.



    [code] </pre><hr></blockquote>
  • Reply 3 of 19
    [quote]Originally posted by ShawnPatrickJoyce:



    <strong>Above: Two conservatives commenting about the Times, the most award-winning newspaper out there... </strong><hr></blockquote>



    Oh NO!!! You're right. What was I THINKING? I have no right to comment on anything the Times does. How could I have gone so wrong? It's just so incredibly out-of-bounds for me to find anything humorous in the Times. I'm so ashamed.
  • Reply 4 of 19
    scottscott Posts: 7,431member
    spaceman_spiff we must repent. As punishment we must read the LA times for one week and listen to 20 hours of NPR.
  • Reply 5 of 19
    Leave it to conservatives to think I'm taking away their rights <img src="graemlins/lol.gif" border="0" alt="[Laughing]" />
  • Reply 6 of 19
    I didn't say you were taking away my rights. I only said that I had no right to do what I did. It was completely improper and out of place for me to think that anything in the Times might be funny.



    [ 12-18-2002: Message edited by: spaceman_spiff ]</p>
  • Reply 7 of 19
    bellebelle Posts: 1,574member
    Easy, tigers.



    On a lighter note, anybody with a handful of Photoshop skills feel like giving us an impression of what the majestic giant sea sparrow may look like?
  • Reply 8 of 19
    "Moddy-poo"?
  • Reply 9 of 19
    bellebelle Posts: 1,574member
    [quote]Originally posted by Hassan i Sabbah:

    <strong>"Moddy-poo"?</strong><hr></blockquote>

    Wanna make something of it, Hassany-poo?
  • Reply 10 of 19
    [quote]Originally posted by Hassan i Sabbah:

    <strong>"Moddy-poo"?</strong><hr></blockquote>



    Where did that come from? What did I miss?
  • Reply 11 of 19
    [quote]Originally posted by Belle:

    <strong>

    On a lighter note, anybody with a handful of Photoshop skills feel like giving us an impression of what the majestic giant sea sparrow may look like? </strong><hr></blockquote>



    Ummm, maybe something like this?



  • Reply 12 of 19
    [quote]Originally posted by Belle:

    <strong>

    Wanna make something of it, Hassany-poo? </strong><hr></blockquote>



    No.



    Hassanypoo.
  • Reply 13 of 19
    Ms. Belle decided to call something a 'poor little snakey-poo'.



    I felt it an opportunity.



    Hassanypoo. I like the ring of that.
  • Reply 14 of 19
    bellebelle Posts: 1,574member
    [quote]Originally posted by spaceman_spiff:

    <strong>Ummm, maybe something like this?</strong><hr></blockquote>

    You know, I've always wondered which species Big Bird belongs to? Though, ironically, I've never questioned which species any of the other Muppets belong to. Other than the genus "Muppet", obviously.

    [quote]Originally posted by Hassany-poo:

    <strong>No.</strong><hr></blockquote>

    Yah, that's what I thought.
  • Reply 15 of 19
    Oversized canary, probably.
  • Reply 16 of 19
    [quote]Originally posted by Jonathan:

    <strong>



    Hassanypoo. I like the ring of that.</strong><hr></blockquote>



    In the circumstances, this is worrying.
  • Reply 17 of 19
    airslufairsluf Posts: 1,861member
  • Reply 18 of 19
    scottscott Posts: 7,431member
    [quote]Originally posted by AirSluf:

    <strong>



    You mean that conservative rag?? No you must delve deeply into reading the SF Chronicle for true repentance!</strong><hr></blockquote>



    No it's too much I can't do it MY EYES ARE BURNING AHHHHHHHH! :eek:
  • Reply 19 of 19
    Perhaps you should not have left your contacts in for so long? Those silly conservatives and their eyewear hygiene. Can't miss a sin can you?
Sign In or Register to comment.