For several weeks, anyone who could put two words together was swinging their keyboard at the New York Times. They pasted together a piÃ±ata with sticky rumors, stuffed it with newsprint, and took their shots.
But while the angry mob demanded answers about the David Paterson story, the Times did what they do best: they put their head down and and patiently worked on a difficult project.
And now that the entire tale is revealed, calling it a “bombshell” is almost an understatement.
Yes, the first story caused mild concern. The second? OK, maybe it raised some serious questions. But yesterday’s installment, bringing forth allegations of tampering in a domestic violence case, that’s explosive.
Two lessons here: if the Internet has done anything it’s made us impatient for the payoff. AndÂ reports of the death of newspapers was an exaggeration.
4 thoughts on “The Newspaper Strikes Back”
I don’t believe Paterson is a very effective governor, but he inherited a mess, works within a dysfunctional system, and has done (or attempted to do) some good things over the last two years. This recent information is very concerning to me. If it is true, I would like to see Paterson and Corbitt resign.
Domestic violence is a crime, even when the abuser is politically connected. If a governor or state police commissioner doesn’t have respect for our domestic violence laws, where does that leave the abused?
This isn’t the first time I’ve been appalled by an elected official’s response to domestic violence. Does anyone else recall Giuliani and Pataki standing beside John Sweeney, publicly announcing their support of him, despite a legitimate police report detailing a domestic violence call? Great message for a former federal prosecutor to send to the abused, huh?
The story was worth the wait, and they have a great crossword to keep you occupied while you wait. The 24/7 news cycle is over-rated.
And if the Times wasn’t working on this, who would have?
> And reports of the death of newspapers was an exaggeration.
Too exuberant. The prospect is that there will be far fewer, far feebler newspapers, not that they’ll all die. The problem isn’t that the paper won’t be around to do quality reporting on NYC-local and NYS stories, but that there won’t be, say, a Troy Record to call bullshit when, say, the city starts selling-off durable public assets to close today’s budget gaps.
The 24/7 news cycle is certainly overrated. Typically filled with recycles news, which is why I rarely watch TV news and I choose Internet sites carefully. I agree with Lou and expect to see the local papers die off over the upcoming years. I hope we are wrong since I believe print news offers better quality.