21–30 of 64 posts
A lot of journalists covered 9/11, so I'm not sure that this particular fashion reporter didn't seem to care is all that interesting. I do think it's an interesting case in the level of acceptability in the actions and admissions of semi-public figures like journalists. Today there's lots of commotion about people posting their hot takes on the Queen's death, a lot of which obviously regrettable. There's lots of even…
It's quite an artifact of its time. Someone appears to be making a play for her magazine editor role and this is basically oppo-research on behalf of whomever they want in place. This kind of scandal playing is sort of how the media game is played, where these were society plum jobs, and journalism in Canada has been a traditional stepping stone to parliament. I was distantly acquainted with some of that crowd, and t…
What, are you just making this up?
I actually kind of like this; she's honest about what she experienced and she recognizes that fashion will take a back-burner for awhile. People experience shock in various ways and not everyone tries to make everything directly about whatever is happening; most of America at least pretended to plug away at their jobs that day.
Someone who survived being stabbed multiple times during a robbery told me, at the time, they didn't even know they'd been stabbed until they got home. I think it had been dark (possibly pitch black), amongst other things.
So yeah it's possible to go back to major historical events and find immediate responses that don't age well. I would argue it's not worth dredging up decades later with an eye toward public persecution - which is front of mind in any twitter thread.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
If you're learning linguistics from wikipedia maybe check out "prescriptivism" and see how many contemporary mainstream linguists work within that framework for native speaker usages.
How does prescriptivism interact with wikipedia? Since wikipedia can (in the ideal at least) be edited by anyone, I'd expect it to match common usage more closely than a normal encyclopedia.
It's quite an artifact of its time. Someone appears to be making a play for her magazine editor role and this is basically oppo-research on behalf of whomever they want in place. This kind of scandal playing is sort of how the media game is played, where these were society plum jobs, and journalism in Canada has been a traditional stepping stone to parliament. I was distantly acquainted with some of that crowd, and t…
> Someone appears to be making a play for her magazine editor role and this is basically oppo-research on behalf of whomever they want in place. What, are you just making this up?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> Someone appears to be making a play for her magazine editor role and this is basically oppo-research on behalf of whomever they want in place. What, are you just making this up?
Who digs up a scan of a pre-internet article to post on twitter to take a shot at someone who is at best a marginal and obscure public figure with an influential job? I wasn't the one who tried to slander someone with decades old pre-internet comments, but I am certainly hypothesizing that the person behind the twitter account is, and that is bog standard politics, as are low quality sock puppet comments in forums.
I think you're imagining conspiracies here. It's an interesting and kind of funny historical artifact, that's all. And what definition of "slander" are you working with here? Nothing posted is untrue.
A lot of journalists covered 9/11, so I'm not sure that this particular fashion reporter didn't seem to care is all that interesting. I do think it's an interesting case in the level of acceptability in the actions and admissions of semi-public figures like journalists. Today there's lots of commotion about people posting their hot takes on the Queen's death, a lot of which obviously regrettable. There's lots of even…
I suppose you can't really fault a person whose professional life requires her to view every event with the question, "How does this affect the fashion industry?" for viewing the attack on the twin towers in exactly that way — especially in this article, which was published as the "Fashion Notebook" column. The tweetstorm blames her for not relating what was told her by survivors and first responders, but those stori…
It surprised me because I'd always assumed a lot of people in a newsroom were extremely similar, despite their different beats. In my mind it's interchangable whether that report on Ukraine counts as world news, war, current affairs, or politics. I assumed this was the 'journalist' skill set in action. But perhaps being fashion editor is no better a current affairs reporter than the crossword setter or cartoonist wou…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> Someone appears to be making a play for her magazine editor role and this is basically oppo-research on behalf of whomever they want in place. What, are you just making this up?
Who digs up a scan of a pre-internet article to post on twitter to take a shot at someone who is at best a marginal and obscure public figure with an influential job? I wasn't the one who tried to slander someone with decades old pre-internet comments, but I am certainly hypothesizing that the person behind the twitter account is, and that is bog standard politics, as are low quality sock puppet comments in forums.
How do you think this went down? How did the person co-opting McLeod approach? I’ve got the scoop of the century, they said? Do you think he fumbled his iPad excitedly on the way to break this, in your words, obvious oppo? (Do you think he’d miss that?)
In general, and I’m not just talking to you here, if you don’t know how journalism works, maybe don’t comment on it nor speculate on its big moves. You say things like “bog standard” to communicate certainty, but your imagined narrative literally falls apart with ten seconds of critical thinking.
I actually think it's unfortunate that she didn't focus more on fashion. There are so, so many accounts of 9/11 that focus on the facts and the immediate tragedy. But I'm willing to bet that 9/11 impacted industries and people significantly even if they weren't directly involved. I have little to no interest in fashion, but I'd find an article on the impact of 9/11 on the fashion capital of North America a much more…
There's plenty to say about the impact on fashion in the wake of 9/11, but there's nothing really to say regarding the day of the attack itself. I don't think that the fashion of the victims in the hospital would have been an insightful thing to write about.