Subject:
|
Re: Official vs. unofficial LEGO postings
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.admin.nntp
|
Date:
|
Wed, 21 Mar 2001 16:04:02 GMT
|
Viewed:
|
2205 times
|
| |
|
|
In lugnet.admin.nntp, Mike Faunce writes:
> Really?
>
> So you put just as much value in an article that is published in the
> Ridgemont High Student Newspaper as the New York Times? The National
> Enquirer vs Time magazine? The Daily Show vs ABC News?
>
> Come on, the conveyance has at least some influence on the reception of the
> content.
Conveyance, as I used it, is the mode of submission. Lugnet is the
publisher of all posts herein. Posts may be submitted by authors on a
variety of paper types (aka email address domains). The author of a piece
determines credibility far more than does the publisher of the piece. If
the Ridgemont High School Newspaper published one of Stephen Hawking's
peer-reviewed scientific papers that he had submitted to them on toilet
paper it would be as "official" as anything he has had published.
The content of the piece would first establish its credibility (a carefully
researched and documented study of the mating habits of AFOLs written by an
anonymous eigth-grader at Ridgemont bears as much credibility as a
fluff-piece by Diane Sawyer on ABC). The author secondly adds to
credibility (based on the established corpus of previous pieces written by
said author). The means by which they submitted the document for
publication bears zero weight. The publisher of the piece bears hardly any
weight, depending, of course, on the established pattern of previous
publications. Even the Enquirer could publish (if they wished) a
peer-reviewed scientific paper by a credible author.
So your point is, really, that a publisher must evaluate credibility prior
to publication. Do we put this piece on the Op-Ed page or the Letters to
the Editors page? I submit that an established author of known identity and
credibility should be allowed to convey his piece to the publisher on
whatever stationary he chooses. He tells the publisher whether the piece is
a fluff piece, creative writing, or a serious investigative story. He says,
"this is an op-ed piece" or "this is a sports story". This is analogous to
a TLC employee choosing to post in a .lego.* group or a .train group. Sure,
a publisher can refuse to publish whatever she wishes. So, too, can Todd
establish rules and restrictions regarding what stationary must be used to
submit "official" vs "unofficial" messages for publication. I contend this
unduly deletes the true (and, ultimately, the only valid) arbiter of
officialness from the equation (i.e., the content of a message).
John Hansen
|
|
Message is in Reply To:
 | | Re: Official vs. unofficial LEGO postings
|
| "John Hansen" <JohnBinder@aol.com> wrote in message news:GAIqxs.73o@lugnet.com... (...) content (...) official (...) Content (...) Really? So you put just as much value in an article that is published in the Ridgemont High Student Newspaper as the (...) (24 years ago, 21-Mar-01, to lugnet.admin.nntp)
|
232 Messages in This Thread:
(Inline display suppressed due to large size. Click Dots below to view.)
- Entire Thread on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
|
|
|
|
