Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News Editorials & Other Articles General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

General Discussion

woo me with science

(32,139 posts)

3. Perhaps there is some shame left at the NYT. Kudos to Ms. Sullivan.

Reply to Newsjock (Original post)

Tue May 27, 2014, 05:02 PM

May 2014

for defending what used to be considered basic journalistic standards.

Please watch out for your job.

It is a shame that the review was so prominent, while this admission that it was a hatchet job unworthy of a major newspaper will probably be read by very few.

Edit history

Please sign in to view edit histories.

Recommendations

0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):

5 replies

= new reply since forum marked as read

Highlight:

NYT public editor: Kinsley's review of Greenwald 'unworthy of the Book Review's high standards' [View all] Newsjock May 2014 OP

Oh, dear. Isn't Kinsley the latest hero of a certain faction? Comrade Grumpy May 2014 #1

The Times Book Review has no standards, high or otherwise frazzled May 2014 #2

+1 ucrdem May 2014 #4

Perhaps there is some shame left at the NYT. Kudos to Ms. Sullivan. woo me with science May 2014 #3

Professional book reviews are obsolete LittleBlue May 2014 #5