You are welcome to look at the talkback but please consider that this article is over 17 years old before posting.
Forum - View topicNEWS: Errata: Lead Designer did not recently leave ADV
|
Note: this is the discussion thread for this article |
| Author | Message | ||
|---|---|---|---|
Colonel Wolfe
 Posts: 370 |
|
||
|
As much as I love this site you would think that Anime News Network, whoever it was who posted this article, would have gotten their facts straight before posting that story. My apologies for offending anyone, but this hurts ADV Films and Chris Hawley for the error in this story. I'm sure that ANN has the neccessary contacts at ADV to get the story right before posting it.
|
|||
|
|||
|
pat_payne
Posts: 179 |
|
||
While that's true, Colonel, everyone makes mistakes once in a while. I remember when I was in Oregon, reading the Oregonian (Portland's major metro newspaper, and THE major paper for the entirety of the state), they once printed the same story twice on the same page, and it made it to press. This is more of a fact-checking error, and for that, that's why media sources have retractions. (Take a look even at the Reuters wire -- often you'll see little parenthetical corrections in between different versions of the same story where the reporter made a gaffe). A simple mistake like this really is forgivable, and as Hawley is safely at the new agency, and as the article said nothing defamitory about him or ADV (such as ADV alleging him being let go for [insert your favorite brand of moral, ethical or performance turpitude here] or Hawley mouthing off against ADV) I can't see how this damages anyone. It seems like it was just a blog entry on an amicable -- "oh, I found a higher-paying job elsewhere" seperation that's no harm-no foul to anyone. If anything, the fact that ANN retracted it as soon as they found out is a credit to their ethics. |
|||
|
|||
Tempest
 I Run this place.ANN Publisher  Posts: 10466 Location: Do not message me for support. |
|
||
|
Yes, I'm particularly embarrassed by this error. All the more embarrassed because, while I didn't write the article, I did post it. I should have checked into it.
What's particularly annoying is that the article itself, had it been 100% accurate, was just barely worth posting. I considered for a while whether or not to post it (in hindsight, focusing on this probably blinded me to the accuracy issues), and decided that it was (just barely) newsworthy. -t |
|||
|
|||
|
Colonel Wolfe
Posts: 370 |
|
||
|
I'm just curious how the news items are posted. I know before I make a news announcement to my own website, which is dedicated to Ah My Goddess, and I have made it a point to verifiy information before it's posted and my site is only a fansite with a very supportive community.
Does the ANN staff have anything in place to prevent this sort of happening? |
|||
|
|||
|
Tempest
I Run this place. ANN Publisher Posts: 10466 Location: Do not message me for support. |
|
||
It's not feasible for us to mandate that every single piece of information be verified with the company(ies) involved. No news outlet (that I'm aware of) has any such rule. It just wouldn't be feasible. One of the assumptions we, and every other major news outlet (not talking about anime here) makes, is that if the source for the information is a reputable news outlet, then they checked the information. For example, if the New York Times reports that ADV did X, we won't find it necessary to verify the veracity of the story with ADV. However we might still contact them for further expansion of the story, but not for verification of the facts. This of course depends on whether or not there are more questions to ask. It has happened that we've sourced reputable sources and actually the stories have been incorrect, however this is a very rare occurrence, happening less than 1 in 500 articles. In this case, since the PR was issued by one company (808), but we reported on it from another company's perspective (ADV), we should have checked up on it. It should be noted that the PR itself was not incorrect, merely our understanding of the PR. Although it is questionable whether or not the PR writer intentionally wrote the PR in order to mislead. The benefit from doing so is obvious. What to check on is at the editor's discretion. Sometimes the editor and writer are the same person. Other times an article is written by one person and edited / posted by another. In this case I was the editor and made the (clearly) wrong judgment call. -t |
|||
|
|||
|
infoman99
Posts: 39 Location: canada |
|
||
|
hahahahhahahahahahahaha, wow it took them a long while,
to realize that, just wow |
|||
|
|||
 |
All times are GMT - 5 Hours |
|
|
|
Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2005 phpBB Group