[VicAjax]

The Time mag cover was an outrage as well.

And to robm321, thus far, you're the only one who's brought up politics. So I'm not really sure what you're talking about.

 

[zotjen]

Quote:

Originally Posted by JSTpt1022 /img/forum/go_quote.gif You do realize this is Fox News right? Just my opinion, but Fox News is one of the worst things on television. This doesn't surprise me at all.

And the NYT is currently one of the worst things in print. I couldn't care less about their political coverage. My comment has more to do with their arts coverage and the fact that they don't have one competent reviewer.

 

[beerguy0]

Quote:

Originally Posted by VicAjax /img/forum/go_quote.gif why? we're talking about journalism... not politics or religion.

It's rare that one sees Fox and journalism in the same sentence.

 

[[zero]]

Quote:

Originally Posted by beerguy0 /img/forum/go_quote.gif It's rare that one sees Fox and journalism in the same sentence.

What are you talking about? I don't see Fox anywhere in that sentence

At any rate, those photoshopped pictures are terrible. They're both blurred at spots where they stretched the photo, particularly Reddicliffe's hairline.

 

[scompton]

Quote:

Originally Posted by [zero] /img/forum/go_quote.gif What are you talking about? I don't see Fox anywhere in that sentence At any rate, those photoshopped pictures are terrible. They're both blurred at spots where they stretched the photo, particularly Reddicliffe's hairline.

I don't know how noticeable that is displayed on TV behind someone talking. If it's on their web site, they're nuts. If it was just on TV, they probably figure they'll get a way with it. And they will.

 

[Kilane]

Quote:

Originally Posted by zotjen /img/forum/go_quote.gif And the NYT is currently one of the worst things in print. I couldn't care less about their political coverage. My comment has more to do with their arts coverage and the fact that they don't have one competent reviewer.

Perhaps, but I'll take NYT over about 90% of the other papers in America right now. Which has everything to do with high quality writing standards, at least compared to the last couple newspapers I've been subjected to.

 

[Snicewicz]

 

[scompton]

Quote:

Originally Posted by zotjen /img/forum/go_quote.gif And the NYT is currently one of the worst things in print. I couldn't care less about their political coverage. My comment has more to do with their arts coverage and the fact that they don't have one competent reviewer.

It's got better arts coverage than either daily here in DC. Do any of the other NY dailies have better coverage? I'm sure some weeklies do as they do down here.

 

[zotjen]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Kilane /img/forum/go_quote.gif Perhaps, but I'll take NYT over about 90% of the other papers in America right now. Which has everything to do with high quality writing standards, at least compared to the last couple newspapers I've been subjected to.

Well, I think "high quality" needs to be defined. NYT reviewers have gotten into the habit of using fancy words and descriptions to describe performances without really providing technical details of the performance. For example, it's nice to know an opera singer's voice "bloomed" and "shimmered" but what about their breath control, phrasing, use of voice (head vs. chest), etc.?

Quote:

Originally Posted by scompton /img/forum/go_quote.gif It's got better arts coverage than either daily here in DC. Do any of the other NY dailies have better coverage? I'm sure some weeklies do as they do down here.

And that's the problem. It's not so much a matter of coverage but having knowledgeable people writing for them. Most articles and reviews are dumbed down and you get the sense that many of these writers don't have any expertise in what they are writing about. They're just reporting general facts or impressions about performances.

Also, on more than one occasion it had to be questioned whether or not the NYT reviewer was at the performance they were reviewing. A few months ago, Bernard Holland wrote a review of an Opera Orchestra of New York gala concert at Carnegie Hall. Holland indicated that mezzo soprano Dolora Zajick had sung a duet with soprano Aprile Millo from the opera Norma. While this was originally scheduled, a program insert announced that this selection had been dropped. The event's publicist had also sent out follow up email regarding this. At no point during the concert did these two women sing together. A few days later, the NYT printed a correction that Zajick had in fact sung a duet with tenor Stephen Gaertner. This again was wrong as it was Millo who sung with Gaertner.

 

[ken36]

GOOD STUFF!

 

[subfocus]

Quote:

Originally Posted by markl /img/forum/go_quote.gif Before this gets closed, I urge the people that watch and believe Fox News to rent the documentary "Outfoxed".

Watched this last night.
Highly recommended viewing; both for Fox 'believers' and non-believers alike.