First it was Columbia Journalism Review .. and now a note for American Journalism Review (AJR) :)

640_071614_otr_abramson1_640

See below from the American Journalism Review.  

I was not suggesting (as AJR says below) CJR call me for my “side” before it published the column about fired Executive Editor Jill Abramson.  I have no side but I do have a  fact, a fact about the Jill Abramson interview that should have been in the CJR column.   A fact and a side are different. 

Everyone can draw his own conclusion from the fact.  

So here is the fact again:   it was my idea to ask about her firing and not Abramson’s.  That is a fact, not a side. :) 

Have some fun with this – and it may seem like a small point and in many ways it is, but also is significant in that we can get pretty loose with words.  I know I can get sloppy with my communications and  I regret when I catch myself.

 

MAKING THE ROUNDS

 After the Columbia Journalism Review raised questions on whether female journalists were being too easy on ousted New York Times editor Jill Abramson, one of those journalists, Greta Van Susteren, offered this retort: CJR should have called her for her side.

click here

CLICK HERE FOR MY EARLIER POSTING about CJR

 

Leave a Comment ()