December 06, 2004
Why I like Daniel Okrent
By no means is Daniel Okrent the public editor objective. But the reason I prefer him to the other public editors and ombudsmen that I've seen is that he's at least free from pretense enough to admit it. Take this comment he received from a reader that is attributed to an editor of the NY Times, Lester Markel. (via Volokh)
The reporter, the most objective reporter, collects fifty facts. Out of the fifty he selects twelve to include in his story (there is such a thing as space limitation). Thus he discards thirty-eight. This is Judgment Number One.
Then the reporter or editor decides which of the facts shall be the first paragraph of the story, thus emphasizing one fact above the other eleven. This is Judgment Number Two.
Then the editor decides whether the story shall be placed on Page One or Page Twelve; on Page One it will command many times the attention it would on Page Twelve. This is Judgment Number Three.
This so-called factual presentation is thus subjected to three judgments, all of them most humanly and most ungodly made.
At least Okrent will admit this. What I read of Paul Moore of the Baltimore Sun and Michael Gettler of the Washington Post, they feel that their job is to explain how the judgments of the reporters and editors are done with a skill that a mere mortal cannot possibly possess. Posted by SoccerDad at December 6, 2004 05:05 AM | TrackBack