Saturday, May 06, 2006

Another questionable exclusive

As they have done in the past, the Times Leader claims another questionable exclusive. Today's exclusive is, once again, based on publicly-available federal records.

Between the newspaper's previous record of questionable exclusives, and their recent tendency to quote their own editors in stories, I don't think Don Sherwood is the only one running scared here. Then again, if you were facing the possibility of being bought out by a hated rival, I'd be running scared too.

4 Comments:

Anonymous Anonymous said...

So I'm clear, are you questioning the exclusive tag because the story was gathered from public records, available to others, or because some other news organization had the story?

9:57 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

the way I understand "exclusive" - it means you are the only news organization in the market to run the story. No one else has it.

4:37 AM  
Blogger Howard Beale said...

I feel an exclusive story is a major story that a station/newspaper worked really hard to get. Something that took a lot of time to prepare, from getting the interviews, to connecting the dots.

Simply getting Don Sherwood's federal campaign records and adding a "Uh oh, Sherwood could be fucked" tone doesn't sound like an exclusive to me. But the TL does has a record of questionable exclusives...

7:41 AM  
Anonymous Punch Lynett said...

"Exclusive" used to mean that a signficiant amount of enterprise reporting was expended, and that there was a near-certain chance you were the only organization pursuing it/getting the interviews/obtaining the documentation.

At the TL it's used the way marketers use "New & Improved" -- it's not really, but we got your attention.

11:57 AM  

Post a Comment

<< Home