I still haven't received a reply from Weapons & Tactics editor/publisher James Bartel concerning my post about his newsletter reprinting old internet hoaxes.
Correspondent Keith Dowers has, though, and sent me what they sent him.
As Mr. Dowers notes, there is no apology. The editor, in fact, appears to defend his decision to run with these, using as justification that he got them from a cop--and we here at WarOnGuns know how infallible the only ones can be...
Bartel also questions the methods and credibility of Snopes.com, noting their generalized policy for establishing veracity and making an unmistakable insinuation with the observation "they make money doing it"--as if he's not.
Considering his retired cop source, Bartel says, it's not their policy to verify what they print and charge their customers for.
How about this, Mr. Bartel--ask your insider source to provide some police reports.
You want to compare your credibility to that of the Urban Legends people, fine. You print not one, but two articles that are word-for-word reproductions of material that has appeared on the internet for around six years, but somehow we're to believe that you're the ones to be taken seriously. Is it standard practice at W&T to publish work done by others (hoax or not) without attribution or payment--and then turn around and charge your customers for it?
This is just about the lamest excuse-making I've ever seen. Bartel deserves to have the marketplace respond accordingly.
Sounds very Dan Ratherish. Remember his explanation about the Air National Guard memo? He said that even if it was a hoax, the sentiments expressed and spirit of the fake memo are true. In other words, even if the commander of the squadron didn't really write the memo, it's how he felt at the time. This is supposed to be journalism?
ReplyDeleteDavid should start a collection of "we're the only ones" for "real" journalists since bloggers couldn't possibly get it right.
How does the old saying go? Pride goeth before the fall? Everybody makes mistakes. Shows the mark of true character in how you respond when wrong.
ReplyDeleteGuess we found out the mags. true character. (Or, rather David did).
Good catch, David.
Most people just can't handle being told that something they believed is complete bull. Even when it's something as silly as this.
ReplyDeleteI'm a long-time fan of urban legends, collecting them back before there was internet access. I've experienced many times trying to tell someone that such and such is only a myth, often to have them actually turn hostile on me. This kind of reaction is ridiculous, but I have found that it's to be expected.
AlanDP--I agree that many react that way, but most people aren't passing themselves off as authorities...this is not the reaction of a professional.
ReplyDelete