Here is the exchange between me and vreaa. Sad that we have such shoddy reporting
Fish10 on 22 November 2011 at 7:45 pm said:
Well done to everyone for pointing out the crass error of the National Post.
This is a great line from the Editor:
“We have confirmed that you are correct and the person used in the story works in condo marketing. If we had known this it would have been disclosed, and that change has been made in the online story.”
No kidding!
So how weak exactly is the journalism on this paper? They ask someone – what do you do? ‘Marketing’. They don’t even bother to ask, “marketing WHAT?” and then they run a rah rah RE storey.
This is what passes for information and analysis at this sorry paper.
Reply ↓
vreaa
on 22 November 2011 at 8:01 pm said:
Actually, it’s probably more sinister than that.
The reporter very likely knows that she works in RE (probably got the lead to interview her via contacts in the RE industry). Then intentionally omits the fact in the article.
Reply ↓
Fish10
on 22 November 2011 at 8:11 pm said:
You are probably right. It is inconcievable that they asked every other question except what she actually does for a living.
If the storey was a plant via the RE industry then things are truly messed up, in fact it shows what little respect we have for the integrity of the MSM (particularly some papers) that we even consider it possible.
This is what passes for information and analysis at this sorry paper.
Reply ↓
vreaa
on 22 November 2011 at 8:01 pm said:
Actually, it’s probably more sinister than that.
The reporter very likely knows that she works in RE (probably got the lead to interview her via contacts in the RE industry). Then intentionally omits the fact in the article.
Reply ↓
Fish10
on 22 November 2011 at 8:11 pm said:
You are probably right. It is inconcievable that they asked every other question except what she actually does for a living.
If the storey was a plant via the RE industry then things are truly messed up, in fact it shows what little respect we have for the integrity of the MSM (particularly some papers) that we even consider it possible.
