tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1266573065584680131.post2051486942055308946..comments2023-05-23T06:58:05.579-04:00Comments on Fugue for Tinhorns: Paulick Report anniversary a time for celebration, contemplationGlenn Cravenhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/09760553404742644042noreply@blogger.comBlogger11125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1266573065584680131.post-66566796746989526152009-06-20T23:06:16.518-04:002009-06-20T23:06:16.518-04:00The return of the anonymous critic.
Seriously, cr...The return of the anonymous critic.<br /><br />Seriously, criticizing me for using a search engine to help direct you to information you denied even existed? ... THAT'S part of your complaint?<br /><br />Yes, I can Google, or Yahoo, or Ask.com, or use any search engine to find evidence that disproves your claims and positions. It isn't because Google is some sort of techno-savvy sorcery or cheating, it's because your arguments are ill-informed, losing ones, easily refuted with readily available information.<br /><br />Funny how the Interwebs work that way.<br /><br />But thanks for adding to my hits and, by stopping to rant, to the length of my user visits.Glenn Cravenhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09760553404742644042noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1266573065584680131.post-65458955216317764022009-06-20T21:54:19.907-04:002009-06-20T21:54:19.907-04:00Well, the Paulick Report is clearly NOT a mainstre...Well, the Paulick Report is clearly NOT a mainstream newsource, nor, I would wager, does Mr. Paulick intend it to be one. The fact that NPR is funded by congress, in addition to private donations from businesses, foundations, & individuals has little bearing on the integrity of their reporting. They've been accused of their bias regardless of whether congress has been controlled by democrats or republicans, and noone has accused them of journalistic pandering to the political orientation of a foundation or individual who happens to give them money. You can, of course, google all this, but you'd do better to rely upon your own devises to fashion tenable arguments and not defend yourself through the unfiltered, quasi-related info. eschewed by whatever internet search engine your computer defaults to first...Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1266573065584680131.post-67575148271001712752009-06-19T23:55:44.240-04:002009-06-19T23:55:44.240-04:00The statement I contested was "Noone (sic), t...The statement I contested was "Noone (sic), to my knowledge, questions NPR's journalistic integrity." That statement was clearly ill-informed, as I showed you. LOTS of people contest NPR's journalistic integrity -- some of them relatively credible people. Whether I found my proof via Google or whether you agree with their arguments is completely irrelevant.<br /><br />And as a journalist for the past 20 years I'm quite comfortable in advising any other journalist that if they can't tell a story straight -- without bias, liberal, conservative or otherwise -- then they don't belong at a mainstream news source. They should either restrict themselves to commentary or work for a publication like "National Review" or "New Republic" where you can wear your politics on your sleeve. ... The integrity of your news reporting IS in part predicated on your ability to give both sides a fair hearing and equal treatment, regardless what you might believe or be thinking.<br /><br />As for NPR vs. Paulick Report, National Public Radio is run by a nonprofit corporation established by Congress, and funded in part by government, in part by contributions from businesses and charitable foundations, and in part by those irritating telethons. If that's the business model of any other widely available media outlet, please inform me which.<br /><br />I plan to speak with Ray Paulick over the weekend, if I can catch him when he isn't occupied, and I hope to turn some of that conversation into a follow-up blog post on this very subject. If we can make the connection, I think you'll find his observations interesting.Glenn Cravenhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09760553404742644042noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1266573065584680131.post-37163235829603650102009-06-19T21:59:55.010-04:002009-06-19T21:59:55.010-04:00I'm sorry, but I fundamentally disagree w/ you...I'm sorry, but I fundamentally disagree w/ your premise that, simply because someone accuses a news outlet of a liberal or conservative bias, that somehow calls into question the journalistic integrity of said media resource. I also disagree w/ your assertion that a request for donations is somehow appropriate for NPR, but is conversely inappropriate for The Paulick Report. In short, you can google whatever you want, but when the logic behind your assertions doesn't hold water, then google can't help you much.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1266573065584680131.post-58019406537915575142009-06-18T17:39:14.157-04:002009-06-18T17:39:14.157-04:00I have no juice or pull with Ray and I do not expe...I have no juice or pull with Ray and I do not expect squat for my donations - seldom and modest as they are. But the TB game is better off a year into the life of his site than it was without. If enough small fry like me send enough, the game might be better for it. That would make a wise investment.<br /><br />This is my first exposure to your work and you should have a PayPal donation button as well.<br /><br />Imagine America with no independent press: yuk!Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1266573065584680131.post-46483577974216326292009-06-18T14:20:36.690-04:002009-06-18T14:20:36.690-04:00Wow. If you think that nobody questions NPR's ...Wow. If you think that nobody questions NPR's journalistic integrity, you don't get out much.<br /><br />Just Google "National Public Radio" and "journalistic integrity" and brace yourself. In fact, one of the first links (that I haven't read) is actually titled, "National Public Radio's shocking lack of journalistic integrity." Or fair.org's piece "How public is public radio?"<br /><br />Conservatives have long derided NPR as liberally biased. Not that they don't consider MOST media outlets liberally biased. But conservatives believe that, at least in part because the network is reliant on congressional funding (largely championed by Democrats), that NPR leans even more to the left than most.<br /><br />When Air America was launched, conservative pundit Andrew Sullivan suggested the network wasn't needed.<br /><br />"I have three letters for you, 'NPR,'" he said. "... I mean, there is liberal radio."<br /><br />I'm not saying that, mind you. (Although I have my own beefs about the legitimacy of NPR's "non-commercial" status. I mean, what is "This program is brought to you by ..." if not a commercial.) ... I'm just noting that if you've missed all that chatter about the integrity, bias, etc., of NPR, you might need to go blinkers-off next race.<br /><br />(Editor's note: Deleted and reposted only to fix a typographical error.)Glenn Cravenhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09760553404742644042noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1266573065584680131.post-75622773826245692442009-06-18T12:14:39.916-04:002009-06-18T12:14:39.916-04:00In response to the second comment and your respons...In response to the second comment and your response to it, whether you're covering a specific industry, as is Mr. Paulick, or the world at large, as does NPR, you should either say it's unethical to accept private donations or it's not. Noone, to my knowledge, questions NPR's journalistic integrity; therefore, why should anyone question Mr. Paulick's for employing the same business model?Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1266573065584680131.post-16686647858037243032009-06-18T11:36:17.667-04:002009-06-18T11:36:17.667-04:00I didn't know in which order these comments wo...I didn't know in which order these comments would appear, so I'm stuck responding to the first "Anonymous" after I've responded to the second "Anonymous."<br /><br />To No. 1, in my brief correspondence thus far with Mr. Paulick, he's told me that my concern about donations is something he did consider, and has attempted to address in a quite-interesting fashion. I intend to go into that later with another blog post, after I've hopefully had a chance to give Ray a call later in the week.Glenn Cravenhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09760553404742644042noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1266573065584680131.post-40882070665150003052009-06-18T11:17:04.795-04:002009-06-18T11:17:04.795-04:00Yes, hence this paragraph above:
"I do know ...Yes, hence this paragraph above:<br /><br />"I do know it's tough to make it in a new business venture. And I'm fully aware of hundreds of sites that accept donations as a means of keeping them alive on the Web. When it comes to journalism, if you're National Public Radio, that's your business model. If you're an independent source of industry coverage, accepting donations is something I recommend against."Glenn Cravenhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09760553404742644042noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1266573065584680131.post-3179738468185099852009-06-18T10:44:29.461-04:002009-06-18T10:44:29.461-04:00Glenn-- in response to your criticism of Mr. Paul...Glenn-- in response to your criticism of Mr. Paulick's request of gifts to support his journalistic endeavors, out of curiosity have you ever, perchance, heard of National Public Radio...?Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1266573065584680131.post-35965666029749353952009-06-18T10:08:58.901-04:002009-06-18T10:08:58.901-04:00I think you're looking at Paulick's solici...I think you're looking at Paulick's solicitation of donations from the wrong perspective when you assume that strings may attach. Certainly I wouldn't expect the relatively paltry sum I donated to buy me anything - my donation was made because I was delighted to find a well established turf writer doing in depth, serious, impartial reporting on a wide range of issues that matter to me as a concerned racing fan. I wanted to support that effort. The Paulick Report gives the average person - like me - a chance to support independent turf writing and occasionally voice my opinions on issues currently being debated. Maybe there are big money donors with sinister motives but so far - as you've noted - there's no evidence that anyone's money is influencing Paulick's reporting.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.com