PDA

View Full Version : Blatant lies in the Tribune


Whitesox029
04-19-2003, 04:23 PM
I don't know if anyone else caught it in Friday's paper, but here is a verbatim quote of a blatant misprint/lie:

"Thursday was only the second time this season the sox scored more than six runs in a game, and they are averaging less than 5 runs per contest."

The first part is simply not true--the Sox scored more than 6 runs on 3 occasions seperate from Thursday's Royal beating. (Not including today's 12-2 defeat of the Indians:

April 5- 7-0 win over Det.
April 6- 10-2 win over Det.
April 10- 7-2 win over Cle.

The second part of the statement was true at printing time, however, the average was in fact 4.93. It is unfair to say "under 5" because there's a big difference between 4.01 and 4.93.

The Tribune is getting way out of hand...now it's not just quantity of coverage, it's quality.

T Dog
04-19-2003, 04:52 PM
The booming voice of the Tribune Corporation would like you to ignore the South Side team.

calebhatesyou
04-19-2003, 05:28 PM
the chicago trib is like the paper from my home town, but worse besause it has a louder voice. it is a mullet wrapper at best. i don't know if you catch mullet up there (daver), but that is the on;y thing i would recommend doing with that rag.

doublem23
04-19-2003, 06:16 PM
I don't know if it's an attempted lie as it is more the the Tribune is always chock-full of mistakes that don't get caught when edited.

kevingrt
04-19-2003, 07:02 PM
I'm stickin with the Herald, we get a lot of front page coverage and they report well and report correct stats. The reporter Scott McGregor is great and does his reports for TSN Magazine too.

Whitesox029
04-19-2003, 07:27 PM
.I don't know if it's an attempted lie as it is more the the Tribune is always chock-full of mistakes that don't get caught when edited.

I'd agree, but I e-mailed the writer and mentioned the mistake [politely] and there was no correction in the paper today and no reply. It wasn't one of the major sportswriters, (Greenstein, Morrissey, Downey) so he can't have all that much e-mail that he can't answer one with a subject line of "Misprint."

doublem23
04-19-2003, 08:16 PM
Originally posted by kevingrt
I'm stickin with the Herald, we get a lot of front page coverage and they report well and report correct stats. The reporter Scott McGregor is great and does his reports for TSN Magazine too.

Oh God, The Daily Herald is completely worthless until they invest in a softer, more quilted brand of paper.

You want Sox news? The best source is still The Daily Southtown.

T Dog
04-19-2003, 08:19 PM
Originally posted by doublem23
I don't know if it's an attempted lie as it is more the the Tribune is always chock-full of mistakes that don't get caught when edited.

I don't know how the Tribune is doing right now, but a few years ago, I recall hearing that they had improved to 200 a day. At an industry conference, that was held up as an example of the difficulty in keeping errors out of newspapers. That doesn't excuse errors in newspapers, as any reader will tell you.

Strictly speaking, an editor can only catch so much. Factual errors in a story is clearly the fault of reporter/columnist. The error in question in this thread would seem to prove Whitesox029's point. The reporter didn't seem to care about getting the facts straight.

guillen4life13
04-19-2003, 11:29 PM
Originally posted by Whitesox029
I don't know if anyone else caught it in Friday's paper, but here is a verbatim quote of a blatant misprint/lie:



The first part is simply not true--the Sox scored more than 6 runs on 3 occasions seperate from Thursday's Royal beating. (Not including today's 12-2 defeat of the Indians:

April 5- 7-0 win over Det.
April 6- 10-2 win over Det.
April 10- 7-2 win over Cle.

The second part of the statement was true at printing time, however, the average was in fact 4.93. It is unfair to say "under 5" because there's a big difference between 4.01 and 4.93.

The Tribune is getting way out of hand...now it's not just quantity of coverage, it's quality.

I'm no moderator, but as far as I know, you're supposed to supply a link to the article.

MJL_Sox_Fan
04-20-2003, 02:15 AM
As a former Daily Herald paperboy, I may be a bit biased but the Herald is a decent paper for sports. (Don't get me started on the quality of the front page and editorials!) But I do have one question for doublem23. Why the concern with the quality of the paper it is printed on? A little short on TP this week?

doublem23
04-20-2003, 03:20 AM
Originally posted by MJL_Sox_Fan
As a former Daily Herald paperboy, I may be a bit biased but the Herald is a decent paper for sports. (Don't get me started on the quality of the front page and editorials!) But I do have one question for doublem23. Why the concern with the quality of the paper it is printed on? A little short on TP this week?

I'm in college, man. Got to cut corners where you can and a newspaper is cheaper than a roll of the real stuff. :D:

voodoochile
04-20-2003, 10:34 AM
Originally posted by guillen4life13
I'm no moderator, but as far as I know, you're supposed to supply a link to the article.

Links are only necessary if someone wants to quote large sections of an article, merely using stats/ideas from an article is not a copyright infringement. Still, it is always nice to provide a link for any article one is talking about, so the other posters can read it for themselves.

Whitesox029
04-20-2003, 09:51 PM
I'm no moderator, but as far as I know, you're supposed to supply a link to the article.

I'm sorry but I honestly didn't think there would be anyone reporting me to whoever for copyright infringements in a WSI thread. Besides that, I believe you must be registered with the tribune website to read any of their atricles within a month. I didn't see the point in giving a link when I gave it word for word right in the post. I also wasn't aware of any message board etiquette other than "Be Nice."

Daver
04-20-2003, 10:23 PM
Originally posted by Whitesox029
I'm sorry but I honestly didn't think there would be anyone reporting me to whoever for copyright infringements in a WSI thread. Besides that, I believe you must be registered with the tribune website to read any of their atricles within a month. I didn't see the point in giving a link when I gave it word for word right in the post. I also wasn't aware of any message board etiquette other than "Be Nice."

The problem is,we have been contacted and warned from more than one publication about copyright infringement,we have gotten large enough that we have registered members from just about every paper in the Chicagoland area,and we don't need the hassles.

:)

TornLabrum
04-20-2003, 10:24 PM
Originally posted by Whitesox029
I'm sorry but I honestly didn't think there would be anyone reporting me to whoever for copyright infringements in a WSI thread. Besides that, I believe you must be registered with the tribune website to read any of their atricles within a month. I didn't see the point in giving a link when I gave it word for word right in the post. I also wasn't aware of any message board etiquette other than "Be Nice."

Sadly, there are Chicago newspapers who do hassle the board moderators when entire articles are lifted an published here, even with attribution. And they are legally within their rights to do so. That is why people are asked to quote relavent passages only and give a link if they really think the article is worth reading.

Whitesox029
04-21-2003, 06:26 PM
I'm sorry but the whole copyright infringement law is really getting out of hand. It makes me sick to have to put "name of document, name of author, page number, copyright date and publisher" after every damn thing I write that comes out of anything other than my own head. There should be no law except to prosecute those people who are clearly trying to pass the idea off as their own, (i.e., rewriting "War and Peace" and signing my name on it.) As long as I say the word "Tribune" somewhere, I shouldn't have to go through legal trouble.

Daver
04-21-2003, 06:36 PM
Originally posted by Whitesox029
I'm sorry but the whole copyright infringement law is really getting out of hand. It makes me sick to have to put "name of document, name of author, page number, copyright date and publisher" after every damn thing I write that comes out of anything other than my own head. There should be no law except to prosecute those people who are clearly trying to pass the idea off as their own, (i.e., rewriting "War and Peace" and signing my name on it.) As long as I say the word "Tribune" somewhere, I shouldn't have to go through legal trouble.

Be that as it may,that is the way it works,and the ones that get the e-mails calling foul are us,not you,the only thing we can do is ask you to comply with their wishes.

Whitesox029
04-21-2003, 06:48 PM
Originally posted by daver
Be that as it may,that is the way it works,and the ones that get the e-mails calling foul are us,not you,the only thing we can do is ask you to comply with their wishes.

Well what can I say to that except---goos fraaabaaaa :angry:

:D: