Thursday, November 22, 2007

Say WHAT, again?

There is an interesting article in the News & Record today about two Greensboro Police Officers suing the Rhino Times.

I'm puzzled by some of the comments made by Rhino editor John Hammer. According the the News & Record article,
Hammer allowed that the articles contained errors but said none were significant or defamatory.

"It validates the series. ... They found very minor mistakes," he said. "If you write 180,000 words about something, you’re going to have some minor errors in there."

Here are my questions:
How many "minor errors" are permitted per word count? Is there a formula that's used?
How does one determine whether the "errors" are minor? For example "not" is a tiny, little word and the exclusion of it might be considered by some to be "minor." However, if left off in a sentence that says, "He was found guilty," the meaning of the sentence changes significantly. Who is in charge of "minor," versus "major" mistakes?
Is there someplace where we can learn what, exactly, the "errors" or "minor mistakes" are? Or do we have to guess?

I'm just trying to understand, if the EDITOR of the Rhino admits the article contains "errors" and "minor mistakes," (because, you know, "If you write 180,000 words about something, you're going to have some minor errors in there.") how we are supposed to accept anything written in the Rhino as credible. The Rhino has published a LOT of words over the years. How many other "minor mistakes" have there been?

Just wondering.


Anonymous Fec said...

I agree. These guys should have shut up a long time ago. But that don't pay the bills.

November 22, 2007 8:08 PM  
Blogger Don said...

I believe Hammer was wanting the suit as now he gets to ask questions under oath. Discovery works both ways in law suits.

November 22, 2007 9:13 PM  

Post a Comment

Links to this post:

Create a Link

<< Home