Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Technology Stocks : The New Qualcomm - a S&P500 company -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: gdichaz who wrote (5990)	1/31/2000 8:22:00 PM
From: Climber	Respond to of 13582

Perhaps it is ignorance - perhaps. But the record of the bias and consistency of reporting which appears seems more. Chaz, the easiest trap for a journalist to fall into is to rely on the same sources time after time. And when a colleague from an affiliated news department (say, the Asian bureau) calls for a lead or background, you give him over to the sources you've developed. The result is that the same take/slant/spin on the news gets repeated over and over, and essentially becomes the conventional wisdom. It's not necessarily ignorance that causes this (though it can be,) nor laziness (though it can be that, too.) Deadline pressures, a high level of reliance on your regular sources, and lack of extensive knowledge of the subject (as opposed to rank ignorance) is a part of the biz. The 5 O'Clock Follies. I can't emphasize enough how easy it is get a seemingly small (but ultimately significant detail) wrong in an otherwise accurate story. Of course, some reporters (but more commonly, some reporters' sources) also have an axe or two to grind, especially if they feel like they've been treated badly or are connected to the competition. Not saying that that's the case here, but I've seen it happen many times, and have unwittingly been party to this kind of source in-breeding and C.W. traps myself when I was in the biz. Climber (PS I appreciate your insight into the Asian scene)

To: gdichaz who wrote (5990)	1/31/2000 8:37:00 PM
From: Lynn	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 13582

You might want to send some comments about the inaccuracy of that passage to the WSJ: editors@interactive.wsj.com I just did a few minutes ago. Lynn