Which interestingly enough implies that they are having so much trouble selling advertising, that they are making up nonsense and pretending it is advertising, so their remaining advertisers aren’t spooked away by the ghost town / dead mall atmosphere.
It appears that the complicated nature of newspaper publishing is a confusing factor here. The Sun-Times did not generate/“write” this piece at all. It was written completely externally to the Sun-Times by a separate entity, King Features Syndicate. The CST incorrectly assumed that King Features or its owner, Hearst Magazines, would have their editorial teams vet the material they authored/“authored” before publication. Since this is self-evidently wrong, the CST has changed its policy and now editorial staff will have final approval over externally-authored pieces, which they did not have before.
Interesting. I guess the question remains, why did they want to print and insert this thing at all?
The episode has shaken up the staff of the paper, who told Ars Technica they fear (the well-deserved) reputational harm (they will suffer because of publishing) Buscaglia’s error-riddled work.
FTFT
I mean I’m not trying to blame the people in the newsroom, they’re doing their best. But yes I think it’s an extremely valid indictment of the organizational structure at work and its ability to produce anything trustworthy.
Which interestingly enough implies that they are having so much trouble selling advertising, that they are making up nonsense and pretending it is advertising, so their remaining advertisers aren’t spooked away by the ghost town / dead mall atmosphere.
It appears that the complicated nature of newspaper publishing is a confusing factor here. The Sun-Times did not generate/“write” this piece at all. It was written completely externally to the Sun-Times by a separate entity, King Features Syndicate. The CST incorrectly assumed that King Features or its owner, Hearst Magazines, would have their editorial teams vet the material they authored/“authored” before publication. Since this is self-evidently wrong, the CST has changed its policy and now editorial staff will have final approval over externally-authored pieces, which they did not have before.
Interesting. I guess the question remains, why did they want to print and insert this thing at all?
FTFT
I mean I’m not trying to blame the people in the newsroom, they’re doing their best. But yes I think it’s an extremely valid indictment of the organizational structure at work and its ability to produce anything trustworthy.